iamshack

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 07:44 AM) Well, the Sox don't own the stadium. Are you thinking maybe their lease has some sort of first-refusal stipulation in it or something? Or maybe that JR would just use his sway with the owners to not approve such a move? One would think that the lease contains some sort of exclusivity in favor of the White Sox, at the very least in terms of other baseball teams using the park. Simply because they lease the park doesn't mean they don't want to make it truly their home. Should they indeed allow the Cubs to use the park as well, one would believe they would be able to negotiate some percentage of the profits would go to more renovations or new construction, or possibly directly added to the team's bottom line.

QUOTE(bmags @ Feb 27, 2008 -> 11:20 PM) no no, i just thought that was the best example of Russert's incredulous "why don't you answer my questions to my absurd standards and I'll interrupt you until I get the answer nobody cares about" Honestly, I disagree with that. How often do we watch these debates and the candidates will dance around the question or refuse to come anywhere near it entirely. Hilary is particularly fond of doing so, although Barack did so about the public financing of the general election question. I see absolutely nothing wrong with Russert trying to make the candidates squirm a bit with uncomfortable questions. Basically, he was trying to get Obama to reject Farrakhan and whatever base he brings along with him, and Obama was unwilling to do so outright. I don't see anything wrong with that. God forbid we try to make candidates make actual decisions as they will have to do should they ever reach the White House instead of skirting around every pointed question and stating they have a "plan" to fix everything.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 27, 2008 -> 10:22 AM) That is inaccurate. He was giving a speech and said something like.. "this is what Hillary is saying... (5-8 sentences later)... if you elect me..." He worded his paragraph poorly and opened it WIDE up for this attack, but in the fairness department, it's not accurate. Right, the paragraph starts out "So Hilary says...."

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 10:33 PM) I couldn't watch real time, but I am watching a few clips of it now. Looks to me like Clinton really is all over the place, playing every card she has left up her sleeve. Played the victim, complained of some sort of media conspiracy, evoking former democrats, comparing Obama to Bush, claiming bad campaign tactics... really just all over the board. Obama didn't look great mind you, I think he was taken aback by Clinton's very aggresive angle in the discussion - she really just couldn't wait to interrupt not only him but the hosts as well. But I think he comes off a little better than Hillary, just because he seems in control, calm, collected. She looks desperate. I thought Obama did look great. He did exactly what he needed to do and more. He not only held his own, but he had nearly all of the best moments of the evening.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 10:52 PM) The general impression I seem to be getting is that this one counts as an Obama win, but the real loser of this debate is Tim Russert, who seems to have just come off as an embarrassment. Why do you say that? Because he made the candidates actually answer questions? I think Russert did a very solid job, as did the always excellent Brian Williams.

QUOTE(jenks45monster @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 05:26 PM) I'm also trying to get interviews from Tim from MLBTR and his crew, Ozzie Guillen, yes Ozzie Guillen, Joe Cowley and Scott Merkin. If and when I get responses I'll post them on here as well. Tim is usually pretty cool. I've talked with him back and forth several times over the past two years and he is usually happy to answer questions for interested parties.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 04:46 AM) You could still legalize and regulate drugs and keep the DEA to attack the true criminals, the black market dealers. Right now tax payers are paying people 6 figures to go undercover and arrest non-violent people buying small amounts of a non-toxic drug. That's a waste of cash. Or you could take most of the power out of the hands of the black market dealers by simply taking away their market. Legalizing drugs and regulating them will put most of these people out of business, unless of course they try to take part as a supplier in a legal market (I doubt that could be possible considering their criminal rap sheets).

QUOTE(The Beast @ Feb 25, 2008 -> 02:13 PM) The "inner beast" does not want to do drugs, drink or have sex at this point. I'm glad you want to have fun but right now at this moment in my life, all I want to do involves things that are more mature than what some college students want. I want to have my serious relationship continue and I want to have it develop into something greater, as it has since she and I started dating. I want to have a smaller group of friends and flourish with them being so close. I would love nothing but having what I've had in the past few years, which is a happy, mature, loving, caring lifestyle. I don't feel that I fit in the age group I do because all of what I want to do involve more mature and developed ideas. Have fun doing as you please, wite, and the rest of you---and I will continue to do what I want in achieving high standards and having a quality life full of values, small groups of close friends, a relationship with my girlfriend and of course, watching White Sox baseball, because that is what I want to live by. Is that really what you know, or what you think? Seems as though some people have impressed upon you some very stringent beliefs and ideas...and that's fine. But there is absolutely something to the idea that college is a time to really figure out who you are- and that involves experiencing different things to find out what you enjoy best, what your strengths are and what your weaknesses are. Believe me, you may want to keep to yourself and socialize only with your best friends and your girlfriend and your video game friends...but there is a whole lot more to collegian life than what you are seeing. Sure, a lot of it happens within a framework of drugs, alcohol, and sex. But one can become immersed in a lot of the activities and social aspects of college without becoming the drunken, obnoxious people you quite obviously are turned off by. I suggest you make more of an effort to see what's out there, because it isn't so much the academic skills you learn in college that prepare you to go out into the real world, it's the social skills you learn that teach you to thrive in the real world.

My experience with young people who drive home this "moral high-road" continuously is that they eventually snap and end up being the ones most affected by alcohol, or drugs, or sex, or whatever it is they are abstaining from and speaking out against. Best advice anyone will ever give in life: everything in moderation And one other thing...alcohol never made anyone do anything they didn't want to do already

This is a great thread, guys. Keep it going. The topic of legalizing drug use is an extremely interesting one. The idea of regulating products which are going to be consumed regardless of what lawmakers and enforcement agencies want to do to prevent them is such a controversial issue. Yet, we have seen the war on drugs fail for the past 20 years, so it's fairly clear that legal regulation is a topic which at the very least needs to be constantly re-examined. The tax dollars alone demands such. I am in favor of legal regulation, however, the bag of worms opened up is something that sincerely must be discussed at length...

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 22, 2008 -> 01:33 PM) Does anyone think that the Aaron that Kate has as a child in the flash forward could be her actual child? Could both Claire and Aaron have died on the island, and a pregnant Kate (who lied to Sawyer about being prego) named her baby after Aaron to remember them? Thoughts? Would seem pretty cheesy, but who knows... I'm still wondering why it is Jack wouldn't want to see Kate's kid, if it indeed is Claire's Aaron...

QUOTE(Brian @ Feb 22, 2008 -> 12:12 PM) I never thought it was anything but Aaron. Also, the age of the kid gives it away as well, doesn't it? Well, we don't know *exactly* when it is that they get off the island, do we?

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Feb 22, 2008 -> 11:35 AM) Dude, you don't read the posts do you. Same problem happened with you before. Charlie = dead. Locke will = dead. It will be his BODY. Hence FUNERAL. Who crapped in your eggs this morning? I think he was implying that Locke's body would never make it off the island even if he did die there....

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 22, 2008 -> 09:19 AM) <!--quoteo(post=1578037:date=Feb 22, 2008 -> 08:34 AM:name=kapkomet)-->QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 22, 2008 -> 08:34 AM) <!--quotec-->And it ain't like SHE made up that comment. She had a speech writer tell her that one. And so, that's PLAGARISM! She had some more plagiarism going on last night... She plagiarized her closing comments. AND... How dare her....that just infuriates me. How could she sit up there and say that he is using someone else's words and then say the exact same thing Bill said?

Do you actually get a Parole Officer when you cut a deal for just probation?

So no debate chatter here? I actually thought he beat her....she had an inherent advantage in that she was able to answer first on a lot of the substantive questions early... One thing she did do....before, I thought if she would win the nomination I would either not vote or I would vote for McCain. Now, if she wins the nomination (which I doubt), I would vote for her rather than for McCain or not at all...

So when Kate told Jack at the airport that "he will be wondering where I am," did she mean Aaron?

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 21, 2008 -> 10:03 PM) I called it. Aaron, which means the demise of Claire, or shes left on the island. Nice. Well, that was clear the moment Charlie died...

QUOTE(EvilJester99 @ Feb 21, 2008 -> 10:01 PM) No she said Aaron I had a feeling that was coming since the moment she and Claire were hanging clothes on the line....but I swore she said "Eric." I even rewound and played it twice....But then again, that would really make no sense, and it was obviously supposed to be a dramatic moment...

She said Aaron? I thought she said Eric?

Well, Hughes is one guy who can at least create his own shot. We need more guys who can do that.

Hughes is making $12 million this year, and $12,827,676 next year, and $13,655,268 in 09/10. Gooden makes $6.4 million this year and $7.1 million in 08/09. Shannon Brown makes $1,044,120 this year. Cedric Simmons makes $1,629,120 this year, $1,742,760 next year, $2,671,651 in 09/10, and has a qualifying offer of $3,734,968 in 10/11. Wallace and Smith combine to make $20.7 million this year. Wallace will make $14.5 million next year and $14 million in 09/10. Griffin makes 1,593,000 this year. So we come out even this year, but actually take on salary in 08/09 and 09/10. This probably means someone else of decent stature will be moved tonight or next season (Hinrich, Hughes, Gooden), because I would think Pax wants to resign Deng at the very least...

That poor Donyell Marshall....

Deng would have had to go to get Gasol.

I actually like Larry Hughes alot...