NorthSideSox72

Still have to heat it up. I'm waiting for cheeseburger, fries, coke, a chef and a waitress in a can. Then, I can truly embrace the American experience of convenience.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 22, 2008 -> 02:41 PM) But it's also doing so because the old school ones refuse to adapt. Instead of adjusting their content or working on their quality, or you know, occasionally getting stuff right, they cut back. When they cut back on actual investigative reporting, the quality of the paper declines, and then fewer and fewer people subscribe, so they cut back. I don't think this is exactly true. People are cutting back because of the internet primarily. And I'd contend that the old school newspapers still get stuff "right" a lot more often than the TV-based media outlets, and most of the garbage internet-based stuff out there. And all the major papers have been going through major changes to their content and layout lately, and are continuing to do so.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Aug 22, 2008 -> 01:44 PM) Two words could solve this problem: Eminent Domain. Well that certainly won't happen under this administration, who has made it clear that they have no interest in passenger rail as a solution to anything. Perhaps under Obama, or maybe even McCain, it might fly. Congress could try it either way, but they won't bother until after the new Prez is sworn in.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Aug 22, 2008 -> 01:41 PM) If I'm not mistaken, those tax increases are basically just a roll back of the taxcuts to the wealthiest 1% in the last 8 years. That may be, I don't know how much exactly those changed in that period. Either way, I don't see it as a good idea to roll them back.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 22, 2008 -> 12:55 PM) Which part that appears in both candidates tax plans turns you against them both? Well, I personally don't think the tax structure (in terms of income tax rates) should change at all, except for annual slot bumps based on COLA. But if it were to change... one, I don't like the idea of giving new tax breaks to the uber-rich, as McCain is planning. When the government is running huge deficits, we are waging 2 wars, and we are in dire straights in energy policy, I see that as an assinine move. Two, I don't like that Obama is putting huge (and those are huge) tax INCREASES on the rich either. That takes money out of the capital markets, ultimately (people in those top two tiers spend what the spend regardless, but any money lost to taxes will be taken away from their investments, IMO). And that helps no one. This federal government needs to balance its budget, get the hell out of Iraq, and go moon-shot towards alternative energy. It can't do that with EITHER of those tax plans, IMO.

Amtrak has been doing huge business lately (not surprising given the cost of driving and flying). Problem is, they can't add capacity or renovate equipment, because they don't have the budget for it. I'd really like to see the US adopt a system similar to what the Brits did recently... treat the rails like utility lines, but open to competition and new businesses. Those businesses share costs of upkeep and maintenance of the infrastructure based on usage. This would create an opening for new rail carriers to jump into the fray, running only profitable routes at first, then expanding. The current system is such that the rail companies own the rails - UP, BNSF, etc. And since they are making a good buck on freight right now, and aren't expert in passenger service, and don't want the traffic issues, they have zero motivation to start offerring passenger rail. Something has to give, if you want the intercity passenger rail system in the US to be anything other than its current state of awfulness.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Aug 22, 2008 -> 11:25 AM) Interesting graphic comparing Tax Plans http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8060900950.html Is there an option C?

QUOTE (SoxFan101 @ Aug 22, 2008 -> 11:18 AM) Well I dont think Dewayne Wise will be back next season, and who knows whats going to happen with Anderson. I definitely think that he could be a very capable 4th OF. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 22, 2008 -> 11:23 AM) With the improvement Anderson has shown this season with the bat, I think that he probably would be starting for most teams that weren't carrying 6 OF's. That was my thinking in regards to Bourgeois as well - Anderson and Wise probably won't be in the org next season. As for Beckham, since he will only have played a couple weeks in Kanny, I'd suspect he won't go all the way to B-Ham to start the season. He'll probably play fall or winter ball, and be in ST camp. But even then, I think they want him to start at High A, then if he rakes, promote in-season to B-Ham. Just my take.

Update from CNN on the Obama Veepstakes. Basically, he's called some folks on the short list, saying they aren't the choice. Also, of note, they say that he will announce (or introduce) the VP at a rally in Springfield on Saturday.

Its really interesting to see the sudden surge of middle infield talent the system has seen this year. Beckham, Escobar, Silverio, Miranda, V-Merc, Paiml, Mollenhauer, Persichina, Kuhn... So, as a fun exercise, I think it would be fun to predict who will end up where in the system (what team, what position) to start 2009. What do people think? My guesses... CHARLOTTE Hudson and V-Merc to rotate between SS and 2B, with Bourgeois and Getz going to the Sox bench B-HAM Paiml, Miranda and Persichina to rotate through SS, 2B (Paiml and Miranda being the nominal starters) W-S Beckham at SS, Escobar at 2B, Mollenhauer repeating and rotating through both positions KANNY Kuhn at SS, Avila at 2B GF Silverio at SS, ??? at 2B As the season goes on, promotions will occur of course. Just curious about opening day 2009. One or more of these guys could end up traded too, which changes things.

Wow. The snark level in the Buster seems to have dramatically increased in the last 24 hours. Probably indicative of the sudden wave of attack ads by the candidates. This is not good strategy by Obama. McCain had been doing nothing BUT going on about how bad Obama is, far more so than the other way around. And I think Obama should have kept it that way, as it seemed to work in his favor. Getting into a war of petty bulls*** (and I find these housing, class and richie-rich arguments just that) only helps McCain.

I'm a little disturbed that Texsox is asking me if I want to play Doctor.

QUOTE (Ozzie Ball @ Aug 21, 2008 -> 12:27 PM) Was it an "analogy gone awry" though? I think he made his point pretty well. The numbers someone puts up in high school, college, the lower Minors, a softball league are irrelevant because if you don't have the tools/talent/potential you're not reaching the Majors. With the numbers Kuhn put up in college if he did indeed have the required tools he would have either gone much higher than the 15th round or he would have been one of those "signability" guys and we would have had to give him $500K to sign him, neither of those are the case so I think it's safe to assume he'll stop hitting as he progresses, just like John Doe hitting .700 in his softball league would. I agree, i think the point is solid. And of course, there are always exceptions to the rule. Some players are drafted low or not drafted at all because they don't have the "tools", but manage to succeed anyway, even at the major league level. Some guys just have the intangibles. They are the minority, but, it happens.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 21, 2008 -> 10:42 AM) RSO is still not really talking specifics. He doesn't have to. He may have the best website EVA! for ideas and platforms, but he's certainly not going to talk to it all. He *IS* negative when he runs around talking about how bad our country is, from Iraq, to the economy, to gas prices, to so and so's too rich and we need to tax them more, to NAFTA sucks and get rid of it, etc. etc. etc. So, yea, I think RSO pretty much blows the lack of sunshine up our asses every chance he gets because he's going to "CHANGE" it all. OK, hold the phone. First, you said for a long time, Obama doesn't have any ideas or platforms, just rhetoric. Now you say he has that on his website, but doesn't give it enough in his speeches. You have also previously said that Obama cries "change" all the time but never provides specifics. And yet, when he points out what is broken and needs changing, that is alos somehow wrong. Look, I can completely understand (and partially agree with) the idea that Obama will NOT be able to make all the changes he promises. No one ever can. But as far as his speeches go, it seems as if you criticize him for being positive, then for being negative, for being non-specific, then for being specific.

QUOTE (SoxFan101 @ Aug 21, 2008 -> 08:29 AM) Are you honestly comparing a softball league full of old people to college baseball? Hey SS2K, I'm pretty sure SF101 just called you old.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 21, 2008 -> 08:59 AM) What part of "America sucks and I'm here to fix it" isn't "negative" don't you understand? (Not you personally, NSS, just generalizing). Actually, even using that phrase, you see a key difference there - the "I'm here to fix it" part. Obama emphasizes that more than McCain does.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 21, 2008 -> 08:33 AM) He's been negative forever. Just listen to any of his stump speeches. I have to disagree. In fact, I think one of the reasons Obama was successful in the primaries was his positivism. And his speeches now are not quite as purely positive (which he was also criticized for), but they are still mostly about changing things and moving forward. One may not believe he can do those things, but still, I think his speeches are still less negative than most candidates over the last few election cycles.

QUOTE (greasywheels121 @ Aug 20, 2008 -> 05:53 PM) He had one of the best HR calls the game ever heard in '05; I'm not sure why he abandoned it. Which one was that? The Uh Oh?

You were all wondering when Obama might go negative? Well, looks like he just did. McCain/Abramoff.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Aug 21, 2008 -> 06:57 AM) why? Everythign I said is true Run Under POW Banner... CHECK! Saber Rattling with Russia... CHECK! Saber Rattling with Iran... CHECK! The post he quoted was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over the top. You basically took a few words, indications or general themes from McCain's campaign, and twisted them so out of shape as to be unrecognizable.

Back in April, we were going to be interviewing Sergio Miranda (Shortstop, Winston-Salem, drafted in 2007). There were some delays, but we're now going to be doing the interview very soon. Please post here any questions you'd like to see asked of Sergio! I already got these, from the previous thread:

I sure likes me some CJ Retherford. David Cook seems to have regained his stroke after returning from the DL - his last five games, he is 8-19 with 2 2B's, 1 HR and 2 BB's. Valido in his first two games at AAA: 0-7, 4 K Cassel looks ready for a promotion, but with B-Ham in a playoff hunt and Charlotte's revolving door of starters, I guess that will have to wait until 2009. Tyler Kuhn looks WAY ready for promotion. Kent Gerst is looking interesting, especially as a CF. Anyone know anything about his defense?

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Aug 20, 2008 -> 04:25 PM) W-S on the road at Salem Carter vs. Abreu http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/st...wswafa_salafa_1 OK, someone explain this to me. Miranda gets promoted to W-S. He plays in 4 straight games, collecting a hit in each game he starts (the 3rd game he only pinch ran). Now he hasn't been in the lineup for 2 days. Is he injured?

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Aug 20, 2008 -> 05:47 PM) Disagree. There will be more people voting FOR Obama because of his celebrity/pop culture status than we be voting against him because he is black. McCain knows that the celebrity thing will help Obama, so that is why he put those ads out with paris hilton in them . I think you misunderstood what I was saying. You are right, there are plenty of people who like Obama for those celebrity bits. What I am saying is, some of those same weak-minded folks are not being truthful when they get a poll call. Some of them will flip to McCain based on those irrational fears or biases I mentioned. The same will not be true of McCain voters suddenly deciding they want a celebrity, IMO. I wasn't making a statement about reasons why people are CURRENTLY supporting or not supporting a candidate. I am talking about day-of-game reactions from people, not currently reflected in the polls. QUOTE (mr_genius @ Aug 20, 2008 -> 05:47 PM) What Obama needs to do is just be the Obama that won the Dem primary. He was more aggressive on issues and ideas. Now he is in danger of becoming the 'if you don't vote for me you are a racist' candidate. I really think he can lock this up if he goes with his instincts and goes back to the Barack Obama campaign that beat the Clinton machine. This 'McSame' strategy is a bad one. He needs to hammer home his ambitions which will win over the voters. I partially agree here, in that his best move is to keep doing what he was doing. But I disagree in that I think he IS still doing that, for the most part.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 20, 2008 -> 05:21 PM) Zogby does not matter to me at all. They make their money by being the outlier...by being the poll that is a good 5-10 points away from everyone else's poll, so it's BIG BREAKING NEWS DRUDGE REPORT HEADLINE! when they come out, and when there's the occasional time where they get it right because there's some sort of last minute surge on one side. On the other hand, yes, it's clearly been tightening nationwide, but really right now it's anyone's guess how things are going to turn out. McCain is dumping money in to TV ads, which, combined with all the free showings he's getting because his ads are deemed "Controversial" has helped tighten the nationwide gap. But while the Obama campaing isn't dumping money in to TV ads like McCain is just yet, they've also been working like crazy M-Fers on their ground game in swing states. In places that are anywhere close at all they're pressing hard on voter registration and focusing harder on local issues (i.e. the DHL deal in Ohio). They're outgunning McCain like 10 or 20 to 1 on field offices in swing states. No idea which strategy will work, but if the Obama campaign can come in to election day at worst 2 or 3 points behind McCain in national polling, which would be a significant weakening of where they're currently at...then they'll probably win it on ground game alone. I think there are two X-factors involved in this election, which are not reflected in the polls (particularly the national ones, which are pretty meaningless). One is what you highlighted - ground game, specifically in swing states. This will result in Obama doing better in those states than the current polls reflect. But there is a second one, and that works in McCain's favor - fear. Fear of the unknown, to be blunt. I think there are people on the fence, who are OK with Obama right now, but when it comes time to pull the lever, they'll go with what is familiar. McCain is more experienced, he's not an outsider, and frankly, he's white. Some people aren't choosing candidates based on issues or party or leadership qualities - they are picking based on their narrow and pop culture experiences. Those people are more likely to believe the ridiculous OBAMA IS MUSLIM or OBAMA IS JUST THE BLACK GUY stuff, just enough to make them hesitate in that booth. So there will be a small vote percentage that goes to McCain at the last second, when they are in the privacy of that booth.