NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Oct 4, 2016 -> 03:26 PM) Guccifer 2.0 is back and hacked the Clinton Foundation server today. This just occurred so people are digging. The Clinton Foundation appears (in the very least) to be tracking donations vs TARP money handed out by the government Not sure why they would be doing that... Here's the other problem. Pay to Play indicates that Banks actually made money. But here's the thing people always seem to forget - the TARP funds were paid back by nearly every bank who received them, with interest/returns, to the government. The banks LOST money on TARP. The only banks who didn't pay it back are the ones that went out of business. So even if the chart is true - which I don't really believe (one article noted this was in a folder called "Pay to Play" which they would never have done) - it would be like saying they donated money in exchange for losing more money.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 4, 2016 -> 03:12 PM) You are making the assumption that these were done for trustworthy reasons. I do not believe that. Not for a second. Especially because none of the decisions made were in a particularly brave political stance, in fact they ALL were made towards the politically favorable stance. That just screams red flag, not change of heart. I am guessing that most of these shifts are indeed for political reasons, as you state. That is still a world better than a lunatic hatemonger at the button, in my eyes. Clinton most certainly will shift for the electorate, but she is also cold as ice and while I wouldn't want to have a beer with her, I think she can handle the pressures of the White House. Trump can't even handle the pressure of mean people tweeting things.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 4, 2016 -> 02:11 PM) Obama took the most extreme aspects of the Bush foreign policy and pushed it forward. Bush bombed: Afghanistain, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya Obama bombed: Afghanistain, Iraq (started a new war there), Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, Syria and Somalia. What's your basis for your argument? I think you are 100% aware how this is not a valid argument. Bush STARTED wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - Obama was left with the back end of it, trying to ramp down from disaster scenarios in both (regardless of whether each or both made sense at the time of decision, they were horribly executed). To put Obama on equal footing with Bush on those topics is without any kind of logic. Oh and the Yemen and Pakistan stuff, Bush did those too and seemingly more often. And Somalia wasn't bombed by either beyond a couple very small events. Now Libya and Syria, Obama owns those campaigns, for good or bad. The rest of your examples are not arguments against Obama in any material way. Bush's adventure into Iraq is what really opened the floodgates and eventually, in part, led to the Arab Springs. He opened Pandora's Box. I'm of the belief that Bush wasn't an awful President, and in fact if you take away Iraq, I think he was pretty average. But Iraq was a politically cataclysmic decision that continues to rock us, and the Middle East and really the world, to this day.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 4, 2016 -> 12:50 PM) Company losing a billion dollars is a lot different than a person losing a billion. And the Fannie Mae thing makes complete sense. Their entire business was to provide loans so when the real estate market crashed they obviously stood the most to lose. Trump is running on his business record. I sincerely doubt that many people would suggest that Daniel Mudd, CEO of Fannie Mae in 2008, should be President. But then again, Mudd probably never personally lost $900mil, so maybe he is more qualified than Trump. That being said, personal losses on taxes to corporate losses on taxes is not really comparable. Exactly. Which also is related to the thing a lot of Trumpeters are missing here. It's not that what he did was "wrong", or whether or not it was smart, or whether or not it was course of business. It's that his approach is 100% non-repeatable in government. His entire success has rested on a combination of loans from his Dad, real estate market connections from his Dad, and a willingness to play every debt game that is legally possible. NONE of those things will help a President, and furthermore, NONE of them are related to any actual leadership skills. They are about what he was born into, combined with an all-in willingness to treat every other human being and everyone else's money as disposable. I've voted for more Republicans than Democrats for President. And I do not understand one bit how anyone could even consider voting for someone this unqualified, this hate-fueled and this bigoted for f***ing Dog Catcher, let alone President. I don't like Hillary Clinton, but even if you see her email server, shifting positions and snobbery in their worst possible light, she's still miles better than the orange jackwagon.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 3, 2016 -> 03:49 PM) Say something positive about Robin? Here's one: Thanks for the best coached team I've ever seen on a baseball field in 2012. I personally thought Ozzie's 2008 was the best-coached performance I've seen from a White Sox team. But Ventura getting 85 wins from the roster he had in 2012 was certainly pretty impressive.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Oct 3, 2016 -> 01:30 PM) ^^^ Wait, this isn't in response to my request, is it? He clearly stated she is running based on the Clinton Prez record - which she is. He did NOT say that is all she is running on. You have turned someone's statement into something more extreme than it was. Why don't you just acknowledge that it was you who added the "ALL" part, yo made a mistake, and move on?

QUOTE (Reddy @ Oct 3, 2016 -> 10:19 AM) SS2k said that was ALL she is running on. THAT is sexism. The nuance matters. When did he say that? I may have missed it.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 3, 2016 -> 09:22 AM) It isn't sexism. She is quite literally using that Presidency as evidence of her ability to be President. The idea that it is systemic is only systemic ignorance. I tend to agree with this. She does bring up Bill's Presidency plenty, which certainly puts those issues in play. That's not to say there isn't sexism at play though, as certainly there is. That last debate was like a video presentation of what mansplaining is. But that doesn't mean it's sexism to put Bill's Presidency into the discussion.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Oct 3, 2016 -> 08:25 AM) I used to be a huge pro-Hahn guy, but the Rollins/Latos/Navarro signings as starters on a "contender" were pretty horrible. Part of me thinks/hopes that KW was behind those moves. I'd love to see one of Hahn or KW gone, preferably KW, just so things can be simple enough to allow the team to have a clear direction. That said, not to be picky, but I really had no issue with the Rollins signing. Anderson was definitely not ready yet, and no one can pretend they knew Saladino would be as good as he's been. It was a signing that made sense at the time, and wasn't a big deal.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Oct 3, 2016 -> 09:12 AM) Robin is a class act all the way, he just wasn't a good manager. It is what it is. I wish him the best in his future endeavors. That about says it.

lol, I was wrooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 30, 2016 -> 10:38 AM) Your frustration is creating things you are stating as fact that haven't happened. The starters have been quite good lately. Turner and Albers are pitching less than any other pitcher. If you can't see how many times this year Ventura left in a starter until they started getting shelled and then still didn't move fast enough, then I can't help you. If you can't understand that I wrote those two shouldn't be there AT ALL, thus leaving more time for everyone else, then I can't help you on that either. You may disagree with me, but there are plenty of facts that you are ignoring.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 30, 2016 -> 10:12 AM) Ynoa is pitching a lot more than Albers. Albers has pitched 3 innings this month and pitched 9 innings in August. What other relievers is Ventura being baseball stupid with? Albers and Turner should just be released, or sit on the bench so the younger guys can go. I personally don't believe in Beck or Minaya as real options, and I wouldn't have added them to the team to begin with, but that's of course subjective. But for those first two guys, they provide nothing. And to be clear I;m not just talking September here. Ynoa barely pitched for weeks before then too, and that really isn't how you develop a pitcher. Then there's the fact that he's leaving starters in too long (with regularly problematic results), which also eats into bullpen opportunities. It's not the entire pen or the entire bench of course - it's a few in each case where I find his decision-making nonsensical.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 30, 2016 -> 09:34 AM) Yes, he's been bad, but if he hits a little bit, and he did hit a little bit in the minors, he can play 7 positions and run. It's an ideal back up. For some reason you like Coats who will be 27 on opening day, and cherry picked his last 29 PA. Look at Leury's last 35 PA. Ynoa is pitching a bit. Albers has basically been ignored the last month. Avi is playing it out as they are hoping his new swing brings some results. He is crap, but he is better than Coats. Besides, you aren't going to get much useful evaluation out of these last games. I am sure Avi will be non tendered. If Leury is out of options, he'll have to show he's good enough in the spring. I don't understand the hate. It's been a couple of years you have been bashing him. You have given worse a lot more time than that. You can parse it if you want to. I am simply pointing out Ventura's tendency to play out the string with players we already know are lousy, as opposed to ones who may or may not be lousy, and I find that baseball-stupid. You may disagree with my opinions and evaluations on players, but I was more using Coats and Ynoa as examples of a pattern.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 30, 2016 -> 09:12 AM) Did Leury try to steal your wife or something? You have been on his jock forever. Calling for his release years ago. He isn't a star, but he could be a useful back up. Considering all the minor league crap you go to bat for, I just wonder if you have something personal against this guy. I actually have similar frustrations around other players. It bothers me that Leury and Avisail (and Matt Albers and a couple others from the pen) keep getting playing time. They shouldn't be in any plans because they are just not good players, and have proven it. It bothers me that Jason Coats, Michael Ynoa and others are not getting playing time, because they MIGHT be part of 2017 and haven't gotten enough playing time to get a good look at them in the majors. It drives me up a wall that Ventura doesn't seem to understand yet another aspect of managing a team - when you're out of it in September, you want to get a good look at any players that might be part of the future. Not hold fast to players who have already established who they are and are not. It's just another example of poor management. Also, useful backup? Leury has been historically bad offensively for a player that has gotten that much playing time. They continual desire to go back to him is nonsensical. I mean, in Avisail's case, at least he's only kinda bad offensively (and terrible defensively).

For those unaware, we do a handful of these a year - posts written by minor leaguers, usually players but also we've had a scout, a Radio and media guy, a team GM and others. This one was written by Brandon Agar, a pitcher who was in rookie ball this year. He wrote about what his first pro offseason looks like, and what he plans to get out of it. Here is his article. These player-written posts are something we are particularly proud of, as it's something that virtually no one else does in minor league coverage.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Sep 30, 2016 -> 12:15 AM) Hilariously Ed Farmer said on the radio today that they are "showcasing" Leury to see if he can handle CF, and if he can, he can be our CF for 2017. :lol: :lol: Nothing says contending team like starting a CF who isn't a particularly good CF and who's career OPS in 152 games is .466.

QUOTE (Donaldo @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 08:25 PM) Are you going to do a recap of the DSL team as well? Probably not. So little is known about most of those kids, and stats in that league are next to meaningless.

I happen to think Michele Obama seems like a pretty cool lady. I also think I don't care, politically, about first spouses. Just doesn't register as politically important to me. Well, except when Tipper Gore decided she wanted to censor ALL THE FILTH (and she was more of a 2nd spouse anyway).

I'm going to harp on this again after a hiatus. Why are they playing a guy like Leury Garcia (who has had hundreds of MLB at-bats and just isn't good) and Avisail Garcia (who has had over a thousand and certainly sucks, though maybe they're propping up his value), while Jason Coats has had 29 PA in a month in a half? By the way, fun with small sample sizes... In his first stint: .091/.286/.136, 9 K in 29 PA. Now since his 2nd call-up in August: .286/.310/.500, 3 K in 29 PA. Neither of the Garcias should be here in 2017 anyway. Coats isn't a starter but looks like a good 4th OF for 2017, so why not get him some more playing time? Eaton plays some CF, Cabrera some DH, Avi sits a little more, and you can even give Coats a game or two in CF and see how he looks. He's a prospect. Not big time prospect, but a guy you actually want to know what you have with. Everyone knows what you have with Leury and Avi.

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 10:23 AM) I had a positive opinion of Jill Stein prior to this year, and now for the life of me I have no idea why I ever did. She's a clown. I felt the same about Johnson, until I started digging a little deeper. Then these Aleppo moments put it over the top.

Somehow, the 2nd Nightengale piece has made the situation even worse. I don't care for being lectured via proxy by the organization that I've spent I don't know how many thousands of dollars with and dedicated so much energy to.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Sep 28, 2016 -> 04:10 PM) I don't think this is ALL political. You're going to see a big action against SA soon. Whether they can prove it or not is another matter. Jurisdiction is provided in the law btw. And the theory is that will seize foreign assets to pay. But you're right, what happens if they don't respond. There's no one to haul into court unless you go grab an ambassador maybe? Pretty sure federal (and international) law prevents putting legal action against foreign consular staff as representative for their country's actions. I don't think that can be done.

I guess I should add another possible scenario, though an unlikely one: that this was a mole hunt to expose media leaker(s). Which is yet another stupid move, but I suppose it could be reality.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Sep 28, 2016 -> 02:52 PM) He also gave a specific policy proposal to implement a program that was infamous for targeting blacks and Latinos. That'll fix racial tension and community-police relations! My favorite part was when he went on that random stream about opening a country club in Palm Springs and actually allowed minorities to be there. What a guy!