southsider2k5

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 13, 2008 -> 12:15 PM) What is all of them? Correct, please select . . . I'll take boring Indiana Cities for $400 Alex . . . In all seriousness, I don't care what anyone says, Indiana has some of the ugliest racism in the union. Kap can help me relate a college story sitting in a gas station in a small-nameless Indiana town. It was us two, and another member of the track team, who happened to be Africian American. Kap stopped to fill up his car with gas, and when he went into the station to pay the guy behind the desk and his buddy in front of the desk who he was talking to, were too busy staring outside at our friend to take Kap's money. I felt uncomfortable, and I wasn't even the target of the stares. I won't even get into the ignorant townie stories that I could tell you from people who lived in the town where I went to college. It was brutal, and made me never want to raise a family in a place like that. I learned that diversity is key to a community, and raising a worldly family.

QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Mar 13, 2008 -> 12:10 PM) what is your definition of an American Car? GM where the HQ is in Detroit, but most of the assembly takes place in Mexico or Toyota where the HQ is in Japan but most of the assembly takes place in the US? I would go with the American car companies, it seems pretty simple to me. I know you can split hairs all over the place (and are obviously setting up to do JUST that), but the fact remains, that the American car companies pay more than their Japanese counterparts, and they offer WAY better benefit plans. The Japanese car companies are costing American's $100,000 a year jobs which include a pension and lifetime health benefits. Wal-mart is costing towns $10 an hour grocery store/pharmacy/toy store jobs, which usually have small to no benefits. I will never understand why companies who take record profits OUT of the US every year, contributing to things like the trade deficit and the falling dollar, yet are protesting out in front of Wal-Mart, as if they are more evil than Toyota or Honda. It is because of precisely those companies that the American car companies are sending their plants to places like Canada and Mexico, and laying off US workers. Silly me, I would rather protect the high paying jobs, versus the poverty level jobs, but what do I know.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Mar 13, 2008 -> 08:44 AM) I think it has much more to do with the general area. Milwaukee is very close to Chicago, for instance. Indianapolis is further removed from a massive urban area. I lived in Dallas for a while, and I don't think life there is any 'slower' than in Chicago. And Austin is friggin nuts. (Though, college town, so that is always a difference.) I just don't buy this connection of pace and geography. I wouldn't compare Indy to most places. It seems like a really big small town to me. I didn't really like it there much at all.

I don't understand how everyone can make excuses not to buy American cars, but then villify Wal-Mart. The irony is too rich.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 13, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) This isn't "The Democrats" disenfranchising anyone. FL and MI can thank their idiot leaders for trying to break the primary rules for their lack of voting. And Texans can blame that goofy system their own state used down there of a primary AND caucus. I mean seriously, what idiots thought that system was a good idea? From the sounds of it... Hillary Clinton and her advisors, well at least until they were against it. The quickest way to disenfranchise people would be for the Superdelegates to not follow the will of the majority at the convention.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 04:35 PM) It's rare that I give credit to GWB but I am happy that he signed the bill that changed the dates for DST. I agree. Life is much easier with light in the evening versus 6 am.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Mar 10, 2008 -> 10:05 AM) I would not mind that at all. He's picked up arguably as many quality players in the 2nd rd compared to the 1st . 1st rounders 2002 29th-Marc Colombo 2003 14th-Michale Haynes, 22nd-Rex grossman 2004 14th-Tommie Harris 2005 4th-Cedric Benson 2006 No Pick 2007 31st-Greg Olsen 2nd rounders 2002 No Pick 2003 35th-Charles Tillman 2004 47th-Tank Johnson 2005 39th-Mark Bradley 2006 42nd- Daniel Manning, 57th Devin hester 2007 62nd- Dan Bazuin once you figure in the salary cap, its not even close. Wow. I wonder if any other teams have draft results that look like that?

For me it depends on who is in goal next year. If Khabi is gone, and Crawford is getting a lot of games, give him the extra defensive help. If not, give me another scorer to fill the role that Havlat should be filling.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 05:16 PM) LOL http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brian-Anders...390071478?ref=s It is certianly lacking in "hunnies"...

Here is a tip... DON'T DO COCAINE!

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 13, 2008 -> 07:00 AM) You are right. All the giddiness for him is based on a few spring training games, but there does seem reason for optimism with Anderson. He worked out hard this offseason, he obviously is hitting better than ever before, I don't think anyone has ever questioned his ability, just his attitude and overall approach. He seems to have turned his biggest critic, Ozzie, around at least partially to the point where you can almost reasonably expect him to get a fair shot, something I really don't think he had last year. Keeping him on the team and sitting him down the first month or so was stupid, it did nobody any good. It isn't necesarily his hitting that has excited me, all though that doesn't hurt. Now that it is sounding like he is finally getting what it means to be a major league player, he has a real shot at playing to his potential, which has been what excited me the most about Anderson. He has a chance to be an upper 1/3 CF in the majors if he is willing to work at it. In today's game of baseball that seems to be worth about $13 million a year on the open market.

QUOTE(max power @ Mar 13, 2008 -> 05:09 AM) I bet a quarter of my posts are about brian anderson. I just don't think he's had a fair chance at the bigs. Some misguided poster in here said he shouldn't get another chance because he was 'terrible for half a season!' Come on. It was his first chance at consistent starting time in the bigs, and in the second half of that season, he improved a great deal. Should we stop everyone who sucks for their first half a season from ever playing at the major league level? If you are referring to my post about a terrible half season, you need to re-read it, along with what I have said about Anderson's status now. I did say that Brian Anderson actually playing at his potential is the best case scenario for the White Sox.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 03:10 PM) You were talking about winning states. I'm trying to make a distinction as to what constitutes winning a state. In the Democratic primary a state is won by who had the most delegates awarded since delegates are ultimately the deciding factor of who gets the nomination. Look at Texas and Nevada for example. Clinton won those 2 states in total popular vote by small margins but Obama wound up getting more delegates in each of those 2 states. At the end of the day her popular vote "win" does nothing to help her cause. Hence why I question why the MSM still counts Nevada and Texas as a Clinton win. What exactly did she win from that? To which I replied what does winning 11 states have to do with anything, when two states can outweigh their delegate totals? Why are they being potrayed as 11-2 for Obama, instead of their respective delegate totals? To me it is the samething, but for the other side.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 12:46 PM) The other flaw in his "logic" is what would BA failing in CF have to do with acquiring a corner OF in Quentin? I think BA can be a very good player, but injuries should be a concern. He gets banged up a lot. At least we know one thing, if the Sox don't win 95 games this year, its Brian Anderson's fault. I know you have grabbed onto that sidebar detail. I should have never mentioned Quentin. He doesn't fit in the Cf arguement. I WAS WRONG TO MENTION HIM. That still leaves us with Williams needing to replace Anderson because he failed. Then he had to replace Erstad because he failed. That left him with unloading three big prospects to get someone to play CF. All of which STILL have the common thread of Brian Anderson falling down on the job, NOT based on the 17 ABs in 2007 which you keep pointing to, BUT the HALF OF A SEASON FAILURE in 2006.

QUOTE(ChiSox_Sonix @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 02:56 PM) With Carlos Vasquez gone that clears a spot on the 40 Thanks for saying that, I was wondering that after I saw that... The question now becomes, who are they targeting that they opened up a spot on the 40 man... Any theories?

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 02:57 PM) You also did not address my original question. The primaries are decided by who gets 2025 delegates first. This has nothing to do with the winner-take-all strategy of the general election. I am not sure what this has to do with the general election in the first place? We are talking about the Democratic primaries and how those are being portrayed, right?

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 02:55 PM) Those states combined gave him 285 delegates. California alone gave Hillary 203 delegates. Add in her 139 from New York state and you have dwarved the total of those 11 states that quick. Yet winning those 11 states is somehow put on a pedistool like it is more important. Its misleading and dishonest.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 02:46 PM) You can't really compare the Democratic primaries and the general election since one has proportional victories and one has winner-take-all. Two different strategies in play. Winning Mississippi is not the same as winning Ohio, and shouldn't be portrayed as such. The whole Obama 11 state winning streak was stupid, because none of the states had any BIG delegate pull to them. The number of states each candidate has won, does not matter. All of the state sizes are not equal, and just giving total numbers of state wins is shortsighted. Hell just think back to the 2004 election when Bush used the same strategy to declare a mandate, and everyone freaked out. Oh how the times have changed...

being a huge Beatles fan, it was hard to listen to that crap last night. It really tells me that The Beatles songs weren't about how pretty they were sung. The prefomance, the song writing, and the meanings behind them were so much more important.

Its the same media who keeps hyping up how many states Obama has won, as if they are all equal wins. The size of the states really matters in an election where population, and therefore delegates are weighted towards big states. Who cares how many states they each have won? Who has the most electoral votes is what really matters.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 10:27 AM) Didn't the Dailykas try to do the same thing to McCain? I guess Rush is more convincing to his followers. They campaigned to do the samething in Michigan because only Hillary was on the ballot there.

QUOTE(SoxWS05 @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 12:16 PM) How about Neil Cotts and Shingo? Maybe Jeff Samarjia (spell?) Shingo got released yesterday after a couple of awful outings.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 12:02 PM) I figured as much San Diego still seems to be a good place. If the Cubs really want him badly enough, who do you ask for? How about Felix Pie, in the trade of disappointing high potential CFs?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 11:49 AM) But you're not. You pick and choose. Anderson not hitting shouldn't force KW to go get 2 OF. He got Erstad. Erstad failed. Owens apparently failed. Pods failed, yet you blame it all on Brian Anderson. If you're going to blame players, don't blame the ones that don't play. You blame BA for "forcing" KW to trade Carter. Last I checked Quentin doesn't play CF. Its not a big in depth thing. Player fails GM has to take action to cover failing player If Anderson could play CF like a major leaguer in 2006, we wouldn't be talking about Erstad, Owens, Quinten, Swisher, and the rest of them. Brian Anderson's failure as a major league CF forced Kenny Williams into action. If you can't understand the logic there, there isn't much point in continuing.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 11:35 AM) Why was it not Pod's fault that Quentin was acquired? Why was it not Erstad's or Owens' fault that KW had to pay the price for Swisher, or why wasn't it KW's fault for not properly assessing how certain players would perform? Ultimately, it comes down to the boss. If you don't like the current state of the team, he is who you should blame, not some guy who had 17 major league at bats last season. It makes absolutely no sense that BA's inability to hit made KW get 2 guys at least one of which maybe both won't even play the same position. I think that is the difference between you and me. I am going to blame the guys on the field, for on the field preformance. If Brian Anderson fails, it is Brian Anderson's fault. What happens off of the field, I blame on Kenny, Ozzie, and/or Jerry. I still say if Anderson was half as good in CF Kenny would have never had to try to fix CF in the first place.