southsider2k5

QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 04:51 PM) yeah, not getting it. So because something has been around a long time and sucks means that it's not to be questioned or changed because it's been around a long time and sucks and people know it? Sounds brilliant. Honestly I think the things today are worse when it comes to political influence being sold off and hidden away in things like riders in bills. Keeping the federal politics out of the capital would seem more important now than ever.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 03:29 PM) Lilly was throwing beachballs. But Kudos to the Cubs fans who were pelting 3 guys in Canucks jerseys with peanuts and beer. CSN was showing his pitching speeds as he went on. He was into the upper 70's on his fastball by the end of the game according to them.

QUOTE (docsox24 @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 03:21 PM) good i will be happy he passes that fraud larussa I'm glad I am not the only one who wasn't a fan.

Guys if we add a big player, it isn't just for 2010. These last couple of years we have watched Kenny changing the core of this team for the younger. Peavy and Rios are just the first two examples. I really get the feeling that we will make a run at one of the big 1Bs out there, and then try to get them to stay for a long, long time. I still see Kenny dealing for someone big, even if it looks like a deadline deal.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 03:37 PM) Except he didn't say that. Are you trolling? He said exactly that. Are you trolling?

QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 03:35 PM) so? The zone was created to be apolitical. That was a couple of hundred years ago. Everyone who lives there knows it, and has always known it.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 10:59 AM) Because its quite clear he doesn't believe it. Like I said, I don't like what he said either. But the idea that he doesn't believe in the phrase you quoted is absurd. He said nothing even approaching that. I just want the discussion to come back to reality, without all the ridiculous hyperbole that I'm seeing on both sides of the aisle here. When the President gets up and freely states that he doesn't believe an individual's rights, and then goes on to say we should force people to do for the collective good... Well its pretty clear to me what he believes.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 09:39 AM) It's scary how far you guys are willing to go to defend the rights of a few people to ruin the lives of everyone else. You had the exact same hissy fit over the Patriot Act. To me, it is the same thing. We as a nation err on protecting the rights of an individual, even when they are not popular.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 09:22 AM) Yeah, that's not what he said. You made a fairly huge leap there. I don't like what he said, but to say he doesn't believe in that phrase is a huge reach. How is it a reach? If he believes it, what else does that mean?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 09:31 AM) BTW, here's the 100% full text. That actually makes it clearer in my mind that he has no belief in the rights of the individual.

Rios

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 08:30 AM) Wait, back up the bus. He said what? Read the statement again. He pretty clearly stated he believes that people should only be able to make so much money, and they should be forced to give their own time and efforts to things they aren't obligated to.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 07:40 AM) Or, you could get paid even more money by a bank the President and keep repeatedly trying to destroy the world!

QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 11:21 PM) Obama's quote: "We’re not, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy." Are you guys serious? Who out there doesn't think that at some point more riches won't help an individual. Besides he adds, "keep on making it [money] if you’re providing a good product or providing good service." In addition, if you listen to the to the quote he says it in his jokey/casual way. You can complain about his policies or that they unfairly burden the wealthy job creators all you want. But this quote doesn't mean s***. I don't trust someone who doesn't at some point realize that more money doesn't really help you, and make your life better. But as Obama states, if you're creating a good product/service (think jobs), all the power to you! In Democratic societies, that doesn't matter. When you have the President flat out saying that he doesn't believe in the life, liberty, pursuit of happiness part of the constitution, it worries people, as well it should. Again, no one in this country constitutionally has the RESPONSIBILITY to grow the economy. Not individuals, not business, not the government. There are morals and ethics to where they should want to, but they it is pretty clear that they shouldn't have to. The fact when the President isn't reading from the script goes off of such anti-individual rants should scare people. What scares me most is that so many people in this country don't see a problem with these sort of statements. If these same sort of statements had been made in context of race, sex, et cetra, there would have been an uproar. But because this is class warfare, no one cares. It is a travesty.

QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 07:41 AM) well, not really but besides that, you'd still have the federal district, but could make a state easily for the 600,000 routinely f***ed from true representation and constant tugging with congress. Their population is comparable to SD or MT At the end of the day it isn't like they were annexed. The rules have been there long before anyone here was born. The zone was created for a very specific reason. Then again it isn't like there is much state based influence left in this country anyway.

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 06:28 AM) The 1936 road gray is my favorite. Wait, sorry, that's White Sox uniforms, not old US flags. How big of a debate was there when that actually came out?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 10:17 PM) What's his mental problem? He just scuffled. He did when he was called up last year as well, then was on fire. I expect him to be on fire soon. He's working on some things. Teahen just struck out 3 times? He's the best alternative to leadoff? If he is, KW had an even worse offseason than a lot of people thought. The other problem with Teahen is he has to play 3B. He is horrible defensively. So we are going to bench Pierre based on short term stats, even though he has a history of hitting around .300, but we aren't supposed to look at the leadoff hitter based on those same short term trends? The last line is a strawman as Teahen is our 3B no matter where he hits.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 09:10 PM) Beckham should leadoff. Emphasize you aren't looking for a protypical leadoff man, just go up to the plate and hit. If he is already suffering from a mental problem, the last thing you want to do is heap more on him.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 10:05 PM) History shows that Teahen's walk pace is going to drop off a bit, and his current batting average is about what can be expected. He shouldn't leadoff. I don't look forward to Mark Teahen batting. I really don't know anyone who does except for maybe his relatives and fantasy owners of pitchers he's facing. Mark Teahen is not a leadoff hitter for a good team. Seeing as we don't have any kind of a leadoff hitter on this roster, there is going to be a downside no matter who is in the spot. If it is Rios, you lose his bat in the middle of the order. It if is Teahen, you have to worry about regression to the mean.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 08:57 PM) I just posted this not that long ago, but for all the flak that Swisher got while he was here and leading off, he still put up a .354 OBP in the 1-hole. It came with a .324 slugging, but you can't fault him for not getting on base. Teahen is as good of an option as anyone on the roster for the leadoff spot right now, so why not? Maybe it'll work. Anything to try and jumpstart the offense. That and I doubt Teahen will turn into a sulking b**** because Ozzie tried him in the lead off spot.

I am not sure why we would be, but sure... http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/MLB-lat...om-April-040310

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 06:23 PM) http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/04/...te-legislation/ First part of legislation has been passed. It looks like this is going to happen. First things first, the Senate has to pass it. Then the PR has to actually pass statehood for once. Then they have to be ratified. There is a ways to go here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 12:27 PM) The real meat to the data is what the "Average" is telling you, because very few people in the public sector receive the kind of salary Lloyd Blankfein does (question; does that could things like Rick Waggoner's $10 million golden parachute as public or private?) It could mean...the federal government hires very few minimum wage employees compared to the private sector. Until it seizes Wal-mart, this is probably true. It could mean...the federal government requires more highly educated workers than most of the private sector. It could mean...a lot of the income in the private sector is counted differently because it is recorded as things like stock options/premium health care and retirement packages for the wealthiest. It could mean...public sector positions provide health care benefits and the private sector, especially for low-income workers, does not. It could mean...they counted all the bank bonuses as public sector benefits since the taxpayers paid for them. Or it could mean we pay a lot of money for pretty s***ty work by our federal government.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 07:04 PM) Pierre mercifully being removed from leading off is the good news. The bad is Ozzie is considering Teahen, a guy whose biggest offensive weapon is a walk and a guy who strikes out a ton and is a brutal 3rd baseman, as the leadoff hitter. Teahen is also a guy who has driven in 5 guys in a month.

QUOTE (docsox24 @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 03:17 PM) that list makes no sense. who hates the astros and nationals? No joke. Any list that doesn't start with the Yankees is garbage.