NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (RockRaines @ May 5, 2008 -> 05:00 PM) Police entering a scene of several drunk LARGE black men and immediately you do not think they may overreact? Theres 100 years of white authority figures reacting too quickly and irrationally, especially in Texas. Through his interaction with the media over the years, and his lack of aggresiveness on and off the field, his story may be exaggerated slightly, but I could see something like that happening. And if his boat was parked at the dock? Even stranger. Not to mention if you look at his criminal history, there has been a false accusation before with charges dropped due to bad police procedure. His prior brushes with the law. his boat was parked, but not at the dock, as I read it. But that's semantic either way. And I certainly wouldn't dismiss that there was some overreaction by the police - there probably was. Just look at his story. Kids or adults, when they have done something wrong, classically just skip parts of the story. Those logical leaps are signals of B.S. Its something I learned a long time ago. The way his story goes, he says "why is that necessary, officer?", then suddenly the officer hoses him down? Come on. Its not impossible, but I consider that highly unlikely.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 5, 2008 -> 02:59 PM) Is it worth noting that the government spent about $20 million on a prototype test of the "Virtual Fence" and it flat out didn't work? Two things. One, it didn't "flat out" not work, it worked but didn't meet the level of expectations for the military. Two, that should be expected with any project involving high tech equipment. It was a test iteration. Heck, the company that produced it was shocked that the government came out the way they did about it. My impression is, Congress feels that an actual wall makes them look tougher. Its more concrete, literally. So they are happy to point out when the first test didn't work exactly as planned.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 5, 2008 -> 03:37 PM) It's always hard to correctly count these things, but I'm reading that today's Superdelegate count is something on the order of 6 for Obama, 0.5 for Clinton. Like I said, by the time we hit WV next week, Obama will pass Clinton in supers. UNLESS, Clinton somehow wins both primaries tomorrow. That may make things even more complicated, if that were possible.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 5, 2008 -> 03:45 PM) If it does go the way SurveyUSA projects, I assume that will be a bad night for Obama supporters? All along, I've thought that Obama needs to win NC by a greater percentage than Hillary winning Indiana in order to stop some of the momentum she's picked up. If Obama wins NC by 5 or 10, and Hillary wins IN by 5 or 10, then its two things. In terms of perception, that's a small win for Hillary (she had a 20 point lead in IN at one point). But in terms of delegates, that means Obama nets more, possibly wiping out Clinton's gains in PA, because NC has more delegates at stake than IN. So, take it any way you want.

QUOTE (vandy125 @ May 5, 2008 -> 04:18 PM) I could probably make the trip from Iowa for the July 19th one. This would be 16 inch, right? We only got 12 inch out here. This is Chicago. We play 16".

QUOTE (frankie5angels @ May 5, 2008 -> 03:53 PM) From another site I saw this lineup posted. I would still like to see Thome moved down. Sox: Cabrera SS Quentin LF Thome DH Konerko 1B Dye RF Swisher CF Crede 3B Uribe 2B Hall C Shakin' up the lineup. Me likey putting Cab at leadoff (he's just starting to look comfortable at the plate), CW 2nd and Swisher in an RBI slot. Very nice. And against righties, Thome should stay right where he is.

QUOTE (shipps @ May 5, 2008 -> 03:08 PM) I will say Iam definetly interested in doing it but I have 0 confidence in any other soxtalkers coming through on this. Well, we did it last year, and we kicked their asses (WSI). I would be in, again.

QUOTE (kyyle23 @ May 5, 2008 -> 02:15 PM) Cougars in Chicago, Jaguars in Arizona At least the cops didnt gun this one down In the discussions in the Buster about the border fence last year, I brought this very thing up. Surprisingly to most people, there are in fact jaguars in SE AZ and SW NM. Only a few right now, but their very small populations are starting to increase a bit. They are still very endangered though. Jaguars are just one of a large number of animals that straddle that region, including a significant number of endangered species. And that is one among many, many reasons why a virtual fence is a much better decision than an actual wall. It would cause serious problems for many of those species.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ May 5, 2008 -> 02:53 PM) It makes me sad that our legitimate prospects are relievers or future utility players. With a few exceptions.

The lack of collaboration is the real issue in baseball umpiring, it seems to me. The umps keep trying to stop the idea of instant replay, well, the best thing they could do to avoid that is get better at working together. Look at the NFL, they are far better about it. The umpiring in MLB is just way too individualistic. On that blown call with O-Cab, one of the other umps (one of them must have seen it) needs to step forward and say they saw something different.

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ May 5, 2008 -> 12:44 PM) My wife and I have had some shady dealings with other "service" companies. I have two words for you: Angie's List.

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ May 5, 2008 -> 01:49 PM) Eww. To each their own. I've been told before I have odd taste. For example, I don't think Angelina Jolie is terribly attractive.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ May 5, 2008 -> 01:46 PM) Most online video games now have a headset where you can talk to the players in a room, or to team members of your own team. It is real time communication. Fascinating. The last real-time multi-player game over the internet I played was X-Trek, which was by the way the first of its kind. That was in early college. Since then, I've tended to avoid video games, except for the occasional outing to D&B's and such. I'm honestly afraid they would just take up more of my time, because I'd end up addicted.

QUOTE (rangercal @ May 5, 2008 -> 05:58 AM) I'm not a Benson Fan, I think his poor play was one of the top reasons for no postseason play last season. But , I believe his side of the story. None of us can know of course, but reading the article, I tend to think Cedric's story is B.S. Its got the classic gap in there. He says he politely asked a question, then the officer just peppered him? Sorry but, I don't believe that. There is s*** in between that he is leaving out, and I doubt anything about the exchange was "polite".

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ May 5, 2008 -> 12:16 PM) The problem is not with the rating system, its with the fact that parents will buy their children games like this no matter what the rating based on the fact that Jimmy down the street has it as well. I play a lot of first person shooters. The graphics and violence in these games shouldn't be for children, but I can tell you that on XBOX live you will encounter 8 to 10 year olds playing the game at 2 to 4am on weekends. The kids are annoying to say the least, they ask dumb questions over and over, sing for no apparent reason, and talk non stop to the point where you have to mute them. I even had a mother get on the mic and yell at some of the people playing the game because they were cursing. I asked her, why is your son who is obviously under 12 playing this game at 3am. I got the dont tell me how to be a parent routine. Now there are boundary lines that shouldnt be crossed. Outside of the chuckle factor, I havent figured out hte purpose of the hookers in GTAIV. Simulated sex acts or not, there is no purpose in the game play. Video NSFW of the GTAIV Hooker. The simulate sex act + hooker cursing. QUOTE (lostfan @ May 5, 2008 -> 12:20 PM) I hate the 12 year old kids on XBL a lot. I usually end up muting them and sending them negative feedback. Whoa, hold on. When you play these games, you are on audio with other people? Wow, I didn't even know you could do that. And I watched some of that video. To say that's graphic is an understatement.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 5, 2008 -> 11:45 AM) But that's just it, he was talking about Thompson, not about Christian beliefs. He didn't even say Thompson's beliefs were the scum-worthy part, he just said Thompson was. The whole thing could have been avoided if people just read the original post. Can we just drop this part of the discussion, please?

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 5, 2008 -> 11:44 AM) If there's been a movie that's been banned then there could be a video game that is banned. Ratings are there for a reason. In GTA IV, one can kill, there's talk of drugs, one can hear sexual acts, but that's it. There's no nudity, there's no actual shots of people doing drugs. GTA IV would be an R-rated film, hence the "MATURE" rating. If a parent buys this game for their child, it's no different than letting said child watch Total Recall. Where's Thompson's quest to ban that film? Hell, there's a chick with three boobs in it! Wanted to highlight the above in bold. This to me is a disturbing trend that has gone on for some time: violence in the extreme is more acceptable than nudity or sexuality. That, to me, is horrible. For all the uproar about Janet Jackson's nipple and nudity in the movies, I think the detrimental effect of those things pales in comparison to the effect of the great tidal wave of violence in movies and video games. Not directed at you Steve, I am speaking more generally here.

Regardless of what we may want to discuss about the game, society, etc., we need to not make this about any religion or class of people. We are coming dangerously close to personal attacks. Keep it under wraps please.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 5, 2008 -> 10:47 AM) Never know what to believe, the SunTimes this morning had an article claiming that Indiana was Obama's to lose. link The polls for these two states have been more whacked out and all over the place than any other states that I can recall. There are IN polls for the last couple days that range from Obama +2 to Clinton +12.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 5, 2008 -> 10:40 AM) More proof Hillary is in this for herself and not for the American people and the good of the democratic party... Clinton Camp Says It Will Use The Nuclear Option And then they can say goodbye to a lot of moderate voters come November, not to mention lose the support of a lot of democratic supers for campaigning purposes. Which is why they aren't going that route.

None of these guys can compete with McNown. He was far and away the biggest bust.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 5, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) okie dokie, Nostradamus. Clinton RULEZ! Well, we might have to dig this post up again come July. Its more likely I'll look like Nostra-dumbass. But I guess we'll see.

It appears that Nathan Jones has taken over Miguel Socolovich's spot in the rotation for Kanny. Socolovich started 3 games going 0-2 with a 9.90 ERA, but then disappeared - he hasn't pitched since 4/16. He is still listed as active, not on the DL, so I am not sure what the deal there is.

Charlotte (13-15) @ Scranton/WB (22-9), 6:00pm CT, Broadway (3-1, 1.25) starts for the Knights B-Ham (16-14) @ Montgommery (11-19), 7:05pm CT, Richard (2-4, 2.91) goes for the Barons W-S (12-14) @ Lynchburg (12-17), 6:05pm CT, Ely (0-3, 2.61) gets the nod for the Warthogs Kanny (14-15) @ Lake County (17-11), 6:05pm CT, N. Jones (0-2, 6.88) starting for the Intimidators

I really can't see Obama taking Indiana - but I do think he'll make it interesting. I'll pretty much stick with my previous predictions... NC (115 delegates): Obama +10 IN (72 delegates): Clinton +4 And if you do the math on that, more or less, that day will give Obama +8 or +9 delegates, which pretty much wipes out the 10 points that Clinton gained in PA. Clinton, though, will fight on. More supers will continue to endorse, and probably keep doing so in the same way they have been recently - which is to say, heavily to Obama. At the current pace (they are already only about 10 apart on supers), Obama will pass Clinton in superdelegates right around the time of the WV primary (5/13). But a wide victory in WV will give Clinton enough "momentum" to stay in it anyway. On 5/20, Obama will win the caucus in OR handily, and Clinton will do the same in KY. The pledged delegate lead for Obama will stay steady at around 150, but he will continue building a lead in supers. There are three primaries in June. PR (6/1) is 55 delegates and Clinton will win handily, probably netting herself 5 to 10 delegates. Obama will take MT (16) and SD (15) (on 6/3) by a wide margin, and gain a couple or four back. But after all this, the facts will remain obvious - Obama will lead in pledged delegates by 150-ish, in superdelegates by a handful, in popular vote and in states won. Behind closed doors, Edwards will be promised a job in the adminstration as AG or sec of HUD or something like that, resulting in him granting his super vote and his 20-some-odd delegates to Obama. At this point, a waterfall of supers will begin to endorse Obama, and he will clinch the nomination by mid-June, averting a convention disaster. In late June or July, Obama will announce Bill Richardson as his VP choice. That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it.