NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (The Critic @ Dec 27, 2008 -> 12:14 PM) Well, which is it? Is he getting older or is his age declining? I must have been watching a Benjamin Button preview in the background.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Dec 27, 2008 -> 11:40 AM) Willy Tavares is a LOT better then Jerry Owens. I don't even consider Jerry Owens a baseball player, that's how bad he is. You are welcome to feel that way. IMO, if Owens and Taveras played full time in the same league in 2009, you'd see them put up pretty much identical numbers. Taveras has a better arm, but also has a broken leg issue. They are a wash to me.

Good. Now we won't sign another Jerry Owens (with a better arm) for more money.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 27, 2008 -> 11:12 AM) What I find in these published rumor reports irritates me to no end. The way the articles read IMO is that the Sox shoulds just be jumping with glee that the Angels see us as the 2nd or third best option and will take Dye and/or Konerko of our hands. We are supposed to feel grateful about this apparently. In my mind Dye and Konerko are two top of the line players and we will be weakening ourselves if we trade them. The goal is to get better not strengthen the Angels or any other team at our expense. The idea here is simple - sell high, and emphasize getting what the team lacks. Dye is getting older, but still competent in RF and very good offensively. He has (I think) 1 year left on his contract, and maybe an option year. His value now is high, but in a year, won't be. With his declining age, he's approaching a point where he needs to be a 1B or DH. PK is also getting older and has shown health issues, and his 2008 was a steep decline. Now, he may bounce back in 2009, or might not. He's got 2 years left under contract. He's still got decent value, but in a year its less, and a year after that its nothing. So, those are two pieces that could net the team some things it is more sorely lacking - a starting quality pitcher, or maybe a leadoff hitting OF or the like. I don't think its a good idea to replace both, though. I'd still like to see, if possible... PK go to LAA for Figgins to play CF, go get another starting pitcher, and acquire one of KC's cheaper and young-ish first base hoard. That improves the overall team without increasing payroll.

QUOTE (mreye @ Dec 27, 2008 -> 08:35 AM) I will as well. It makes zero difference to me where it started. Opinion column in the paper, radio show, whatever. Its slimy. That simple. Now, if you two are defending it in the sense of "they should be allowed to do that", then I agree - legally. No one should stop them. My protest is from a personal viewpoint. Someone who uses that as a political ploy is just showing me how low they are willing to go. And as others have said, hey... if the RNC wants to keep getting the asses kicked politically, then by all means, continue doing things like this.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Dec 26, 2008 -> 09:48 PM) Honestly, they both are. But if you really want to nit pick, caffeine is the true starter drug. Starter drug? No. Most commonly addicted drug? Yes.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Dec 26, 2008 -> 06:54 PM) Well, not just marijuana, but also prostitution and just their overall drug policies. I know it isn't a perfect example as they are one of the most liberal countries out there, but I have a feeling the USA is heading in their direction. Basically, when I have kids, I don't want to ever take them there for a vacation. Well, just avoid the red light district. The rest of Holland is quite nice, I'm told. I don't really see the US becoming Holland, or even going that direction. And in fact, Holland is now changing some of their laws regarding prostitution and drugs, so they are headed more towards us.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Dec 26, 2008 -> 06:36 PM) For the Holland thing, I was just trying to point out how having marijuana, and prostitution, and all that "good stuff" legal has worked out for them... not good. What has been "not good" in Holland due to marijuana?

QUOTE (BearSox @ Dec 26, 2008 -> 06:34 PM) A few thoughts... Keep the porno age at 18. Sure, 99.9999% of all teenage boys go online and lookup "stuff", but still 18 is the right age. If you are going to say it's all right for 14-16 year olds to do you know what to themselves, then that just leads to bad things such as age of consent, etc. Not really a big deal anyway, as anyone can get it for free online. Besides, I doubt you'll see too many kids in trouble with the law (probably with their parents) for owning a playboy. Are you saying that porn should have a legal age of consent because we should be setting an age at which its OK to masturbate?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Dec 26, 2008 -> 05:32 PM) This is one time I'll defend Rush Limbaugh. Since Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton didn't think Obama was black enough, and the LA Times are the ones that ran with the story saying that, of course some wing nut is going to satarize it. Always remember: John McCain is George W. Bush. You are seriously going to defend that song? Really?

QUOTE (BearSox @ Dec 26, 2008 -> 06:05 PM) Well, it sure has worked in Holland... I don't really see what you are getting at here. QUOTE (BearSox @ Dec 26, 2008 -> 06:07 PM) I bet there are plenty of fat smokers who would trade 10,000 cigarettes for 2,000 big macs. But this was damn funny.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Dec 26, 2008 -> 01:02 PM) Obesity is real bad, people that are really fat are pretty much doomed to bad health and early death. 2000 Big Macs is real bad. A few Big Macs isn't. With cigarettes, most people have a few, and are hooked. So just a few cigarettes ends up being bad for a large percentage of people. So I don't put them in nearly the same category of how "bad" they are.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Dec 26, 2008 -> 10:10 AM) very well written and explained. so the next link in discussion though is the hypocracy associated with some decisions rather than others. Government has decided that it is ok for me to poision my body with fast food, cigarettes, alcohol, own a gun but i can't shoot a firework off, put $5 on the Bulls to win tonight, hear a swear word on TV, or enjoy in adult activities with another consenting individual. Here in Illinois, I can... * Own a firearm, but not a roman candle * Bet on an animal, but not on an individual * If under 18, can eat 15 Big Mac's a day, but not smoke a cigarette * If 19, go fight in a war, or even be drafted, but not drink a beer. * If 16, drive an automobile as fast as 65MPH, legally, but not buy a Playboy. it seems that I have the right to engage in very serious activities, (firearms, wars, driving, etc) while not the right to engage in less serious ones. (smoking, drinking, etc) Comments on your examples... * Own a firearm, but not a roman candle There is no constitutional right to own a roman candle or any other firework. Not comparable. * Bet on an animal, but not on an individual This one I sort of agree on its silliness, though there is the fact that humans can corrupt other humans, not animals. Sports gambling can effect those sports in a very negative way. * If under 18, can eat 15 Big Mac's a day, but not smoke a cigarette And so it should be. Cigarettes are far more dangerous than Big Macs. * If 19, go fight in a war, or even be drafted, but not drink a beer. 100% agree with you here. * If 16, drive an automobile as fast as 65MPH, legally, but not buy a Playboy. Really? You can't buy a Playboy before 18? I didn't know that. But frankly, I think the driving age should be raised to 18 anyway. ---- MJ should be legalized. It just makes so much sense on so many levels.

I usually take the Damen bus to the Blue Line to go to work. I waited 25 minutes this morning and didn't see a single Damen bus, in EITHER direction. I gave up and got in a cab. The ice is wicked out there - don't go out if you don't have to.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 25, 2008 -> 02:06 PM) He's a great fit; I don't see the Sox having the desire to give up any pieces for a backup catcher though, unless Philadelphia would take MacDougal for him. They've never given much effort into getting a good backup catcher, so I don't think they would now. I see it as Blanco, Miller, or Stewart as of this moment, with the favorites obviously being Miller and Stewart. Throw Lucy in there as an off chance. If he can be healthy enough by ST to play the same way he did in 2008 at AAA, then he's what he was then - looking ready to be AJ's backup. I have no idea what the chances are of that, though. Not great I'm sure, but not zero either. I haven't been able to get any info on Donny's situation since the summer.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 24, 2008 -> 11:58 PM) Wow. 8 years and they still haven't figured out how to do the most basic things. Of course, there's another issue. They may wellnot be able to reverse their decision after granting it. Once a pardon is granted it can't be revoked, the issue is how far they got along in processing the documents. We'll wait for some more constitutional interpretation in a few days. This is truly a mess. Someone obviously handed Bush a list of recommended pardons, he rubber stamped it.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Dec 25, 2008 -> 01:26 AM) Why did he use a shoe and not something like a cell phone? Because of the symbolism. Just because the object is symbolic, that doesn't make it or or not make it assault. The two facts are wholly independent of one another. If I throw a brick through your window, its criminal damage to property. If the brick has some symbol painted on it, its still criminal damage to property. By any reasonable interperetation of US or common law, this was an assault. Iraqi law? I have no idea. But how could you see that shoe go right where his head had been and think it wasn't meant to hit him?

QUOTE (Texsox @ Dec 24, 2008 -> 10:48 AM) This guy did not invent some new insult. The intent, as is the long standing custom there, was to insult and not to actually hit him. Just like flipping him off is not to actually hit anyone with your finger. This seems to be the point that many people are overlooking. This was a traditional gesture. The man had many other objects available to throw at Bush if the intent was to assault him. He did throw a cell phone, clipboard, lap top, chair, he threw a shoe, because that is the custom. Basically you guys would be saying that flipping someone off should result in jailtime. But yes, if Bush was actually hit and died, or any other silly what if you want to come up with, it would be different. Just as if someone was flipping someone off and accidentally killed them or caused them to need stitches. But instead, just like when you flip someone off, no one is hurt, this guy managed the traditional and long standing custom perfectly, and no one was hurt. I don't see how you can think he didn't intend to hit Bush. The shoe sailed right where Bush's head was, if he hadn't quickly (and, I must admit, deftly) dodged it.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Dec 24, 2008 -> 08:47 AM) ^^^. I am really missing not going to be able to go surfing on a beach on Christmas Morning. Well, you COULD surf off a beach on LI or the Jersey Shore. But you'd better wear your dry suit.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Dec 24, 2008 -> 08:01 AM) That's the dilemma. I think Anderson would hold down CF just fine and I believe Getz will nail down the 2B job, but you have to have somebody hit at the top of the order. If Getz can put up numbers like he did in his last few years in the minors, he's not a bad leadoff candidate.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 04:49 PM) Funny how those 100 ballots, all for Frankin, that mysteriously appeared in the backseat of an officials car may just be the difference here. Democrats, and Minnistoians in particular, should be real proud fo themselves. First jessie Ventura, now Frankin? You get what you deserve. Ventura was bizarre, but he wasn't all bad.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 05:10 PM) I don't understand where you get the .210. Even with sporadic playing time, he's never hit lower than .225 during the season and, given regular playing time, I could easily see him hitting .240-.250. With the defense and power he provides, I would endorse Brian Anderson as the CFer hitting 9th. Limited playing time against lefties. .225 is probably more like it. .240 maybe. I just threw numbers out there to make a point, but yes, .210 is too low. And again, I am not saying Kotsay would be some giant upgrade. A moderate one, if healthy.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 03:36 PM) shealy is a big oaf. i'm surprised he's even on the KC 40-man. He'd only be as slow as PK. And I think there is a good hitter underneath there. By no means is he a long term solution probably, but for a year or two, I think he'd do for cheap. The rest of the 1B market is thin. I'd still rather have Kila.

QUOTE (jenks45monster @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 03:25 PM) Kila Ka'aihue? That one. Actually, I'll probably get slammed for this, but... I wouldn't be opposed to getting Shealy, who finally started to show some good stuff last year.

So, if the Bears win and Vikes also win, Vikes win the division... can a 10-6 Bears team make the playoffs under some wildcard scenario?