southsider2k5

Ramirez had one of the worst all around games I have seen in a while yesterday. His defense was something out of a drunken slow pitch softball league.

Guys they need a long reliever. Forget Nunez and Link. Plus they have no 40 man roster spots.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:45 AM) The question is does anyone here eat chorizo, I'm wondering what else anyone would do with it? Come on, living on the Mexican border, I am sure you know something about eating hot Mexican sausage... right?

QUOTE (Texsox @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:13 AM) Makes me miss Garland even more. He hasn't really been much better this year so far... http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/...o01.shtml?redir

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 08:59 AM) I want to know, if people think that the release of these documents is politically motivated, how in the hell is defending the contents of them NOT politically motivated? (I don't like the public discussion of interrogation techniques which has nothing to do with politics, and I'm fully confident that the majority of people defending waterboarding etc. aren't eye-to-eye with me on this, it's all about how they feel about the Obama administration's decisions and I won't be convinced otherwise.) The one thing I will agree with is that it puts the lives of troops in danger, which for me at least, isn't political.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 07:46 AM) ANd some people still wonder why I live on the border . . . going to White Sox baseball>looking at hot chicks

I'm glad Venezuela is giving us our land back... I suppose we could have just pulled a Chavez and took it in the first place if we really wanted it.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 08:30 AM) Torture is incredibly overrated IMO and I wish more people would focus on that, if they did, these arguments probably wouldn't be so heated. Eh, its the same to the left as abortion is to the right. Its the hot button topic that gets people all fired up. People who believe in it can't understand how anyone could ever take it away as a legitimate tool. People who don't think is it a horrible thing, that should never, ever be done to a human. There really is not a middle ground.

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 08:32 PM) Yes...cause that was obvious booing towards the front office for the awful decision of leading off Wise. Maybe the Cub fans were just booing Hendry for signing Bradley...

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 10:31 PM) More coming. The ACLU's lawsuits are paying off in droves. So we can release this, but not the minutes from board meetings that Obama administration officials attended at the banks we are giving trillions of dollars to? What a joke.

QUOTE (DABearSoX @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 04:04 PM) http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=69445554939 Invite as many people as possible Here is the group created by Soxtalk! http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6944...4750&ref=mf

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 09:01 PM) Not in the least. The specific documents that were released came out based on an FOIA act request by the ACLU and multiple court orders requiring their release. The only thing that was their decision is how much to attempt to redact, and if they redacted too much, they'd risk having another court order them to un-redact a good chunk. Funny statement, because they pretty much only redacted the "good" things that came out of it...

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:49 PM) Our methods are definitely less direct, but to say people haven't been killed by the Western world for ridiculous reasons is a lie. Individuals and governmental organizations is two completely different things. Let us not lose sight of that.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:39 PM) Whoa, here we go with isolated incidents. This can go both ways you know? Kinda like being forward thinking on stem-cell research meaning that he is a guy who isn't in control?

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:38 PM) You get that from Sean Hannity or Bill O'Rielly? Nice diversion. You are the one who starting the name calling, it makes it kinda hard to effectively cry when someone else calls you on it.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:36 PM) What did you expect from a President that lost the popular vote? That is immaterial to the question at hand. Someone tried to make the point that Obama had critics before Bush did in relative stages of their service. Its simply not true.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:32 PM) Thanks for that. It pretty much proves exactly how quickly Bush was ransacked. His approval rating was under 50% on Feb 1st of his first year. That is amazing.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:31 PM) 1) Khomenei has been hugely against the development of nukes, much less using them. 2) Mahmoud is smart enough to know how far you can go before America gets angry enough to attack Candidates must be approved by a council of 12, the Ayatollah has no direct say in the Presidency. Talk about propaganda... Geesh. Do you also believe that Rich Daley has no direct say in the City Council? They might not "technically" be picking people, but the entire world knows whose ring you have to kiss to be able to serve in either locale.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:29 PM) The problem is...its entirely possible a U.S. intervention could explode things. To a large extent, the US intervening is what got things to this point anyway...

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:28 PM) More than that, it depends on who you think is in charge of Iran's military. Iran's military is under the control of the Supreme Leader, not Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad does not control Iran's military. If the clerics didn't buy the line of thinking, they would have banned Ahcy from running. They do it all of the time, why would he be different?

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:27 PM) Yeah but Khamenei is pretty forward-thinking, didn't he push for Iran to legalize stem-cell research before the United States? There are quite a few checks on him, he can't just do whatever the f*** he wants. Plus there's a Parliament which still handles almost all of the legislature. Forward thinking has nothing to do with a relative level of control. They are two completely different things. And yes, he can do pretty much whatever he wants, because he controls who is allowed to end up in office. Its almost like calling the Chicago City Council an effective check on executive power, when Rich Daley hand-picked 90% of them.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:25 PM) I don't really think so though. It's capabilities vs. intent. Do you assume that Iran wouldn't be deathly afraid of retaliation from Israel (or the US, or the UK, or France, or whomever)? If they nuked them, what retaliation would there be from Israel? There would be nothing left. I am also not really convinced that the rest of the world would even use nuclear weapons in response. Tell me honestly, do you really think Barack Obama would answer an nuclear attack on someone else with our nuclear weapons? I just don't see it.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:20 PM) Yeah Duke, Iran barely qualifies as a democracy, you should stop citing that as if they were equivalent to Western democracies. When one person decides who is allowed to run for the Presidency, it really isn't a democracy.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 02:17 PM) One of the biggest reasons why it wouldn't be necessarily bad if Iran got nuclear weapons. Iran is fairly ethnically diverse, but their constitution is fairly clear about equality between those groups. The CIA has actually tried to destabilize Iran by inciting ethnic tension, and it didn't work. Iran is a strong, democratic and stable country with a loudmouth president who knows better than to match his words with actions, there's not much to be worried about giving them nuclear weapons. Israel being the sole nuclear power in the region is pretty dangerous. The one deterrent they have against using them is losing the support of the United States. If Iran got nukes it would force peace talks on Israel across the board, a lot of concessions by both sides and a huge decrease in violence matched with an increase in diplomacy. The region is a mess, and giving the most established powers on both sides nukes will put everyone on their toes. Most of you are so programmed with the "axis of evil" drilled through your thick skulls that you can under no circumstances view the international system from the lens other than that of an American. It's really a waste of my time to even argue this point. So having a guy as a leader who believes he has to destroy the Jewish state in order to bring about the return of the last prophet doesn't factor in at all for you? Talk about a waste of time. If Iran got nukes, it would turn Israel into a glass parking lot and go celebrate. Of all of the nutjobs in the world, Iran's leader is the one I would say that would be willing to use nuclear weapons without a second thought.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 23, 2009 -> 12:20 PM) Conversely, you have seemed incapable of ever giving him credit lately. It's Obama Derangement Syndrome, and it set it much earlier than Bush Derangement Syndrome set in for most liberals. As for the second bolded part, isn't that for an investigation to determine? Everyone is susceptible to confirmation bias. Aren't you accepting the claims that the information was good/ prevented attacks that otherwise wouldn't have been stopped at face value while scrutinizing any other claims much more heavily? I call BS on this point. Because of the nature of the 2000 election and the aftermath of it, Bush was being stung before he even took office. Obama has had his critics, but it has been a vocal minority at best. For the most part he has generally gotten the benefit of the doubt on just about everything.