Chet Lemon

I would like to see Egbert in Charlotte, but that might make too much sense.

Politte, Cotts, and Hermanson (until he got hurt) enjoyed career years.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jul 31, 2007 -> 03:12 PM) Wow. I hope that someone sees the irony of people b****ing about the return for Mack and Gooch, yet being angry about not giving up Dye for two pieces of crap. Exactly. I like Mack and Iguchi as much as the next guy, but Mack will never become a starter and Iguchi's skills have diminished.

Perhaps one of the pitchers SD acquired in the Linebrink deal?

Poreda came in to pitch the bottom of the 6th, and promptly got three straight ground outs.

Jason Donald + another prospect? http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/st...&pid=453228

QUOTE(PeteDogg @ Jul 30, 2007 -> 03:17 PM) Luckily, we have Greg Walker to provide that. A+

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 01:48 PM) You aren't making this team better without first getting worse (or so the saying goes), and one of Vazquez and Garland needs to go. I'm not sure it really gets any simpler than that. I tend to agree as long as the team receives players that will significantly improve the offense.

Egbert and Gio also play on a team with a pathetic offense.

Sox should trade Podsednik now while he is healthy for a Lujan-type player.

I would like to see Dye resigned to a three year deal if both sides can agree. I would pass on Pods due to his frequent stays on the DL. That leaves LF and CF open. We could have two viable in-house options in Sweeney and/or Fields (pending Crede's situation). Fields has given all indications he can play in MLB as a starter. Sweeney should not be given a starting job unless he earns it in camp. A major FA signing would probably be necessary to soldify the OF.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 11:49 AM) or was it the 4 that voted not to enforce current state laws which were acting politically? I don't think so because the four dissenters thought that the State Court violated Equal Protection like the majority. Where they differed was that they argued the Supreme Court should not have decided whether or nor to stop the recount, but instruct the State Court to provide clear standards for recounting ballots.

In light of recent happenings, could the Sox swing Heath Phillips for Scott Olsen? Phillips is rightly buried beneath a plethora of our young SP, but could probably step into the Marlins rotation this week. Olsen is still young and would be low risk, high reward-perhaps out of the pen.

Guillen said that Gonzalez would see some time at short, so I thought he would stay up. Maybe he meant short in AAA. At this point, I don't care either way.

With talk going around of Uribe not being brought back and the thin FA market for SS's, any chance the Sox could get Tulowitzki and an OF from the Rockies for Garland and McCulloch?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/06/sam...iage/index.html On the marriage amendment that failed last summer:

Most excellent!

Speaking of the Marlins, I would like to see Hanley Ramirez in a Sox uniform. He would be the premier leadoff hitter in the game for many many years to come.

Owens also = poor man's Joey Gathright?

I would like to see Carter promoted immediately.

It is true that Rehnquist was not a judicial activist. He upheld Miranda in Dickerson when he wrote the opinion. I am sure he personally despised the Miranda decision, but knew personal displeasure was not adequate to amend Constitutional Law.

His opinions in Helling, Dickerson, Gonzales v. Oregon vis-a-vis his opinion in Gonzales v. Raich. He clearly finds no Constitutional protection for Miranda and Tinker, yet when the Court made an erroneous decision in Raich, he dissented in Ore. to show the double standard of the court's precedent. I agree with his dissent in Raich (he is correct when it comes to the commerce clause), but he dissented in Ore. for reasons of precedent compatible w/ Raich. Precedents like Miranda and Tinker unlike Raich are not a few years old, they are several decades old. All lower Federal and State courts have relied on them to apply law. When activist judges want to overrule long-standing, established precedents w/o special justification, it creates court backlogs and bureaucratic nigtmares that make the UN look like a dream. His dissent in the Michigan Law School cases that the Court was deferential to elite institutions, but ruled against VMI's discrimination policies b/c it was "a less fashonable southern institution." I don't really care about his stance on policy issues, but given that the VMI decision was not at issue and his son attended VMI in the late 90's, he let his personal views and straw man arguments dictate how law should be applied. This is judicial activism of the highest degree. I noticed we are both 1-0 at Sox games this year. I saw Buehrle's 100th win.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jun 26, 2007 -> 09:11 PM) Depending on how the whiny little brat did it, it would be disrespectful. Why do you think many inner city schools are such s***holes? There is no respect for the teachers and the kids know that teachers are powerless. I agree with your logic, you should write this to all school boards. Bravo! QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jun 26, 2007 -> 09:11 PM) Thomas also noted that in parentus locus, or however you spell that, still applied which limited the scope of teachers powers, but not to the degree that Tinker did. So, based on your love of Tinker, you think Thomas is the worst justice in recent history? I clearly stated "arguably the worst justice in recent history." QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jun 26, 2007 -> 09:11 PM) How about those that decided it was ok for the government to take private property from cictizens and turn it over to developers, just because it could generate a larger tax base? Wouldn't that be a worse decision? Any statute upheld that violates the constitution is wrong. QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jun 26, 2007 -> 09:11 PM) As for no other justice agreeing with him, by issuing the verdict they did, in a way they agree with him. If they wanted to overturn Tinker, they would have. QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jun 26, 2007 -> 09:11 PM) Are there any other Thomas 'missteps' that are stuck in your craw? Or are you just a flaming liberal on a conservative witch hunt? Do you equate Bush with Hitler? This is rational, pulitzer-prize worthy criticism.

So Clarence Thomas just wants to overrule Tinker? No big deal, haha. "The better approach is to dispense with Tinker altogether, and given the opportunity, I would." He wants a time when "Teachers commanded, and students obeyed. Teachers did not rely solely on the power of ideas to persuade; they relied on discipline to maintain order. Schools punished students for behavior the school considered disrespectful or wrong." Under those circumstances, students would become subserviant to virtually anyone employed by the schools. Imagine if students were suspended for challenging a teacher who believed that President Bush is a war criminal because their in-class challenges endangered "order" and were viewed as "disrespectful." It is not one-sided. I don't agree and thankfully neither did a single other justice.

Anyone read Clarence Thomas's Concurrence? Not even Scalia would sign on to it. I used to think Thomas was unfairly critcized by scholars when they would rip him for not asking questions during oral arguments, etc. I think based on his opinions, he is arguably the worst justice in recent history.