NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 02:22 PM) so with that logic, if I've been saving for years to buy a new car and then spend $30,000 in 2009, did I run a deficit? what if I bought the car years ago, and am paying interest at $700/mo for 5 years instead? Its playing with terminology here. You don't have to worry about even finding other funding or shoring it up in a big hurry, its fine until the 2030's. Its just that its going to start using the trust fund - which is for this very purpose - earlier than anticipated. Its worth noting and monitoring, but nothing worthy of panic. What is not being discussed though, that I have brought up before, is you DO put the whole shebang at serious risk when you continue to allow Congress to BORROW from the SS Trust Fund for general purposes, which they have been doing for a while now. That, IMO, needs to stop immediately.

QUOTE (sircaffey @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 01:47 PM) Why can't Matt Thornton be a quality closer? A broad question here, but has there been any study done about the transition from top setup man to closer? I don't know of any study, but I have certainly seen examples of guys transitioning to closing from mid-late relief and failing for no apparent mechanical or stuff reasons. Being a closer simply takes a different player-personality type. Thornton may or may not succeed, I do not know, but I wouldn't bet on it. Its not about stuff (though keep in mind that Thornton is a 95% one pitch pitcher), its about attitude and approach. QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 02:13 PM) That is why I would be afraid of Matt as our closer. We'd have to find a situational guy and/or another lefty to be able to get that outs that Thornton currently does. That's another reason - hard to replace Thornton in the role he is already in.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 02:17 PM) Google it. They aren't the only ones. How about that bastion of neutrality, factcheck.org? http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/abortion-...is-fabricating/ Eh, that's about what was said before, and makes sense. It doesn't fund them in any direct way, but insurance plans that are new public plans (which by the way, as of now, aren't even IN the Baucus plan as I understand it) COULD cover them based on their own coverage guidelines. But this is all moot anyway, as there IS NO PUBLIC PLAN in Baucus' bill - remember how that was left out?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 01:33 PM) And here is how abortions are getting funded... http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PR09I05&f=PR09I05&t=e So, a posting on the Family Research Council's website, with no actual quote or reference to the bill in question, and I am supposed to believe this is true? I call foul.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 01:14 PM) Sometimes I wonder where people get these crazy ideas... http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/articl...sLILKgD9ASKCQG2 This is the question I asked recently about this new plan - what is being cut in those payments? I still don't really know.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 01:02 PM) Can either of you draw a free-hand 50 state map as good as Franken? Actually, yes, I think I could, or close to as good anyway. I used to do that as a kid, if I was bored, I'd draw maps of the US or other places. For fun.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 12:52 PM) He'll get $7M-$8M so it depends on your definition of the word "reasonable". Well, here is what I mean. Let's say he gets that much. Now, you can put Thornton and his much lower salary (I think $2.5M) in that role, but he's not a closer and I give him at best a 50/50 shot at succeeding at even a 2009 Jenks rate. Likely, he'll do worse. Anyone we acquire in trade that is a proven closer will cost as much as Jenks anyway, maybe more in a combination of trade bait and salary. You could find a not yet major league guy in-system or elsewhere, give up something in trade maybe, but that is an even bigger crap shoot. For a guy who has been, amazingly for his "conditioning", pretty damn reliable for years, and who I happen to think will be solid in 2010 if he stays in some semblance of shape, I'd call $7M reasonable. I value closers. I think having a guy you know will close things down at a high rate is as important as the rest of the bullpen combined. So I don't find that number a problem.

I'd have to dig up the post, but as I showed earlier in this thread, his year is not reflective of a pitcher in decline. He had a bad month in, I think July, then was nasty in August. September I'd have to look. I agree he needs a conditioning routine, and some offseason work, but I think he can be had for a reasonable price this offseason via arb, and its just not at all easy to find a reliable closer. If Jenks is kept up on conditioning this winter, I'd bet he has a very good year in 2010.

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 11:32 AM) I read one rumor on the internets that Jenks is hitting the bottle again and it's a distraction in the clubhouse. Source?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 12:18 PM) Religion is a funny thing. Achy believes that it is Iran's destiny to destroy Israel and bring about the return of the prophet. The rest is secondary. He still wants Iran to survive though, which is not possible if he attacks Israel.

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 10:35 AM) I guess it's a reminder that this planet hasn't run out of stupid fans. You are pushing the line of personal attacks here - cool it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 11:47 AM) Being elected President doesn't mean that you're necessarily intelligent. Maybe I'm using a more strict standard than you, but in my head, I've got GWB pigeonholed as a frat guy who got in to a fancy college because of his dad's money, who had no interest in learning anything he didn't need to learn (policy included), and who shuts down completely when you try to educate him about anything to the point where he can actually make an informed decision. I'm not exactly talking learning disability here, but I don't think anyone has put Palin at that level either. They're both in the same boat for me. Whether one is 5% less interested in national policy than the other doesn't strike me as mattering that much. Maybe it's a bit of Fuzzy math. There's an old saying in Texas, I don't know if it's in Tennessee but I know it's in Texas that goes fool me once, shame on, shame on you....(10 second pause)....fool, you can't get fooled again. By the nature of the process, you simply cannot get to that job without being pretty smart. There is variance there among the "smart", but, no way he is dumb, or even below average in intelligence.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 11:41 AM) Are we talking US Geography or worldwide? The subject was US, but I am flexible.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 11:39 AM) Disagree. No one who has held the office of President, even W, has been an idiot, or stupid, or anything of the like. Most are genius level intelligences. Bush is probably not in the rarified air of the smartest Presidents, but he is not a moron or anything of the like.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 11:29 AM) Anti-intellectual, sure. But not an idiot by any means. Agreed.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 10:29 AM) At this point has anyone seen her "normal" personality? I'm starting to think this is it. I've listened to some of her speeches and seen interviews, and what I see is a wavering back and forth that I believe is her injecting exaggerated quirks for effect. But she has been doing it so long, its probably instinctive now. And no, obviously, I don't know here personally so I can't say for sure. Just my opinion. In any case, real or fake or a bit of both, she belongs nowhere near any sort of leadership position - she is either really that dumb (which I find unlikely), or she is just a little dumber than the people typically at her level but plays up the hick angle which says she thinks everyone else is stupid. Just not good, either way.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 10:21 AM) I'm beginning to think more and more that the dumb hometown bimbo isn't a schtick. Its been going on for too long and its too consistent. I am not saying its 100% a play, I think its an exaggeration. I think she plays up certain aspects of her personality for effect.

That is good news. Kanny had some solid performances this season, some guys to watch, and many will be in W-S next year, so hopefully that new talent combined with a new stadium should be a nice boost for the fan base down there.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 09:58 AM) Ugh that woman is among the dumbest in the world. I'm sure she is actually smarter than the average American on the street. But she isn't the sharpest tool among high level leaders, to say the least, and she makes it worse by playing up the whole home-town-girl schtick because she thinks if works for her (and to a certain degree, she is right). More than anything, she is just an embarrassment.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 09:57 PM) I was trying to figure out why this looked so familiar, then I recalled that, if I remember some of your posts right, we went to the same high school. You went to New Trier? Played in Jazz I? Anyway, since the iPod is sitting here at the desk in front of me, a newly shuffled 10... Dream of Picasso, Caroline Lavelle Ghost of a Chance, Rush The Distance, Live (I also have The Distance by Cake) Something unintelligible in Japanese from The Symphonic Suite from Akira Romeo and Juliet, Indigo Girls (wifey) Spirits in the Material World, The Police The Becoming, NIN Deb Deb's Face, Lester Bowie Breakdown, the Alan Parsons Project In the Jailhouse Now, the Foggy Bottom Boys (from O Brother Where Art Thou)

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 08:40 AM) *Throws down the gauntlet* OK. So, um... how do we do this?

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 08:32 AM) I'm pretty confident I could beat you. *tumbleweeds blowing* *Ennio Morricone music playing* Sounds like a challenge, mister.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 11:15 PM) Right now I'm reading Leaderless Jihad by Marc Sageman, for my last class. Awesome book. In the whole intelligence community during the war on terror genre, I really enjoyed See No Evil, by Robert Baer.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 04:39 PM) Money was made so 'cheap' because there were so many fears after 9/11 that the attacks would cripple us. Hence you get all these homes where people pour all their equity when they had no business having those homes to begin with. I'm definitely not the first person to say this. This is just not at all the case. The economy had already been headed down for awhile, and yes of course, there was a huge drop in the markets and an acceleration of the recession at that point. But it was economic and monetary policy, in the effort to pull out of the already-underway recession, that made money "cheap". I think you are doing a bit of revisionist history here. QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 04:39 PM) We were attacked and we responded with military action against those we deemed responsible. The Bush Administration probably got it wrong on the responsibility part and their biggest justification for Iraq turned out to be a lie, but not reacting with any public display of military force would've looked very week. Why does everyone keep lumping Afghanistan and Iraq together? Bush had to go to war, the whole country did, against Afghanistan, and we did that. Then, before Afghanistan was anywhere near stable, we started pulling out of there so we could go start a new world order in the Middle East by starting our own little democratic disneyland where Iraq used to be. Too bad it didn't work out that way, which lots of people could have told him (and lots of people did). But his "justification" of WMD, was only that - a justification, not the real reason for going. He had political gold in Afghanistan, then made one of the worst mistakes of any executive in decades - he got talked into starting a revolution in the Middle East by people he chose to surround himself with (and who controlled his foreign policy to a great degree).

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 04:30 PM) Yeah but the effects of 9/11 (credit crisis, the wars, domestic liberties) were more than enough to overwhelm patriotism-induced ratings. 9/11 caused the credit crisis? That's interesting, haven't seen that before. And I think you are missing that "the wars" are, again, political gold, AT FIRST. Wartime Presidents are bulletproof usually. Iraq didn't become an albatross until the majority of the nation figured out it wasn't a cake walk, which unfortunately just started happening right before the 2004 election.