Texsox

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 9, 2012 -> 08:51 AM) Tex, the problem occurs when people ignore what a dog is. Dogs are not children. They are not human. As you point out indirectly, they did not evolve on couches or eating Kibbles and Bits. They evolved IN THE WILD for thousands of years, and then humans domesticated them. They are still adjusting to this domestication now. Your common house dog evolved from wolves. They share many of the same biology and evolutionary experience as wolves. Their instincts are very similar. Wolves are hunters and for the most part, carnivores. They will eat other things, such as berries or grains, but their teeth have evolved to tear meat from bones. In the wild, many times, meat is scarce. Any type of food is. Therefore, when wolves kill their prey, they will often feast on every part of it except for the fur. They will eat it over the course of a day or a few days, and then rest. Their stomach does nearly all of the digesting in their gastrointestinal system, and this requires as much as 24 hours if they eat until they are full. They can then go days without food, as their bodies have evolved to process stored fat much more efficiently than humans. In fact, it is at this time when their bodies operate most efficiently...better than when they are eating on a regular basis. This is basically how a dog's biology works. Now think about they manner in which most people treat their dog and feed their dog. Will this domestication lead them to kibbles and bits, or primal cuts of animal? We are at the stage where dozens and dozens of generations have been raised on kibbles and bits, seems like that part of their evolution is complete. Of course if we start comparing the very worst of the human processed foods compared to the best our conclusions will be vastly different. Are they domesticated enough that we need to regulate their food intake or are they wild enough where we can leave them a bounty of food and allow them to eat what they will? Bottom line, compared to living in the wild, our domesticated dogs have a far easier life. I'm not certain if it is better. It is easier and longer. But we've taken a wild animal and locked them up in crates and houses (basically a bigger crate). We take them to the doctor and dentist, clip their nails and cut their hair. Is it better for them? I'm not certain it is.

It is interesting how far some people wish to elevate their dog's life from what it would be in the wild. The dogs closest wild cousins do not have someone cleaning their teeth, carefully deciding what, and how much, they can eat. Yet they seem to survive. I don't have a problem with someone that wishes to treat their animal as close as possible to a human, I also do not have a problem with someone who treats a dog like an animal. It is really just how high you want to elevate the dog's life from what it would be without a human to care for it.

It's #1 with unemployed alcoholics. Not hating on the state, Alaska in summer is about as close to perfect as I can think of. But it is a tough life in some respects.

Hmm, Kay Bailey Hutchinson would be an interesting pick if they are looking at women.

Rios yeah, why not?

Dunn

Konerko

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Apr 8, 2012 -> 04:22 PM) lol. I'm not even gonna respond to that clown. But what's the criteria for creating a thread these days? We've got "Da Manager" thread and "Cowley summing up the season" after one game thread and this trash? Terrible. Looking past the titles there have been some interesting comments in each of those threads. You never know which thread will spark something.

I was surprised to read Mike Wallace was 93.

Blood Meridian is starting to grow on me.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Apr 8, 2012 -> 08:47 AM) Best case scenario is that Dunn, Rios and Peavy are the top 3 in the vote, regardless of who wins it. And they don't even have to have career years to win the award. A pre 2011 average year would get them votes. And why 90 wins is probably more reasonable than 90 losses.

QUOTE (shipps @ Apr 8, 2012 -> 08:54 AM) Premature?...I think its perfectly reasonable to give somebody an award after two games. Obama only won two elections

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 8, 2012 -> 09:46 AM) I think your jobs have become more difficult as kids have begun to get into real trouble at an earlier age. There is also a lack of respect for authority figures and their elders in general by kids. However, if legislators try to put you in the role of teachers AND parents, you will likely fail at both. Ain't that the truth. There was a cartoon that zoomed through our school a couple weeks ago. Basically it showed parents in 1970, holding a report card and yelling at their child "these grades are too low". The next panel was in 2012 with the same parents yelling "these grades are too low" to the teacher. About 5 to 10% of my kids just do not care about school. They do not turn in assignments that we do in class, forget about homework, abuse school equipment, talk constantly in class, etc. Keep in mind we provide free tuition, books, and supplies *and* feed them breakfast and lunch. I need to have 90%+ of my students to pass the state assessments. On those rare occasions when a parent will answer the phone when the school is calling, they will blame the teacher for their child's attitude and behavior. We don't like their kid, we pick on them, other kids are also talking, our class is boring, etc etc. It is almost never the child's fault. I won't even mention the inappropriate clothes they wear to a parent teacher conference. That tells me they either do not own any clothes without plunging necklines and too short shorts or do not understand a learning environment. I don't care if they are new or old, etc. Just put on something that doesn't look like you are going out to a club to hook up with someone. In fairness I also have 5 - 10% of the parents who monitor their child's grades, call us if they see something they are concerned about, call us to schedule and appointment. These are the kids who are usually A-B students. So the more I think about it, a campaign to get common sense back into the schools would help everyone.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 8, 2012 -> 09:11 AM) No, we just expect you to use common sense and good judgment, which you darn well should have already if you're teaching children for a living. I wish it was that easy. But that's not how laws are written and interpreted. Common sense tells us that when there is only a year or two it shouldn't be a problem. Common sense thirty years ago was a 15 year old male having sex with a 23 year old woman was OK and he was a lucky kid. Hell a lot of people believe that today. Bottom line, with termination the most likely outcome for not reporting, common sense says that teachers will report. Remove the penalty for not reporting, and common sense may come more into it. But when the law basically says if you have prior knowledge of, and do not report, an act of abuse or illegal activity involving a student, you will be disciplined, possibly terminated, teachers report. And "I didn't think it was a crime" is not a defense. Remember, I'm with you, that common sense should come into play. A teacher should be able to say I didn't believe a 18 and 17 having sex was illegal and should be enough to stop any discipline. But by a strict reading of the Texas laws governing reporting, if later it turns out to be illegal, the teacher is in trouble. How can you blame someone for protecting their career? Again, contacting our on campus cop protects me, and if the relationship is illegal, protects the victim. If it is legal, the cop does nothing, and life goes on. But I agree, teachers should be allowed common sense. But as we move more and more towards national standards and such, teacher judgement is valued less and less. And remember that a teacher having all this information is extremely rare. I would have no way of knowing the age of a non student. I have no way of knowing they are having a physical relationship unless something really unusual happens. Most teachers will go their entire careers without ever confronting this situation. We are far more likely to learn of a student living on their own, being physically abused, being truant while working in the fields, etc. than anything involving sex. A student in my class of 8th graders saying he's having sex with some girl in the next town I can ignore because I have no knowledge, nor would I want any, of the other girl. About the only investigating I can recall being done was involving child pornography when a boy was showing pictures of a naked, underage,female. We followed the law, looked at his phone, and he was turned over to the police.

Should we acknowledge that Rios also sucked badly enough last season that he too could earn the award? Yes. And now that I think about it, Peavy could with 20 wins. Come back from a surgery that no other pitcher has done. And in some ways Rios has a better shot, he can play some D, which hopefully we won't see too much of from Dunn.

Schools can't regulate, society does through laws. Just like schools do not regulate child endangerment, we have to report it when we learn about it. Schools have to follow the laws and have to err on the side of reporting. Taxpayers, who would bear the burden of a large settlement if we didn't, demand it. Schools are reporting because the law requires us to. We are trained that we are not police officers, attorneys, judges, or juries, we are teachers and we have a duty to report and allow trained professionals to decide what, if any, actions need to be taken. And of course there has to be something that brings it to the school's attention. Schools should not be out playing detective trying to bust kids. But when events happen and knowledge is obtained, it has to be reported. If you believe society would be better if teachers were not required to report possible cases to police with the punishment of losing their careers if they don't, have the laws changed.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 7, 2012 -> 10:18 PM) The Rangers outhit us 10-5 and left about 7 other line drives and hang with 'ems/just missed it's all over the field. The key play that inning with definitely Alexei Ramirez's basket catch in short LCF. The runner reaches there and the entire complexion of that inning is changed. Good point. Better teams manage to win games they should have lost and bad teams manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It is too small of a sample size but I wouldn't mind a season of winning ugly.

I had to listen to the game on MLB radio, but the ninth sounded pretty sweet.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 7, 2012 -> 07:07 PM) Yes. If Kenny Williams was told to cut payroll by $25 million this year, and there is any chance he would be given only 1 year to see the rebuilding process through, that would reflect very bad on ownership. Very few teams can cut that kind of payroll while playing for "That year". You can't demand those 2 things and be a fair owner. Firing the GM for not winning enough games after forcing that level of payroll cut would just be ridiculous. You can't ask him to plan for the long term and then fire him based on short term performance. If they were going to fire him, then it should have been after last season. If he's retained for this year, then you need at the very least 2 years of evaluation to see where the rebuilding process will go. 3 would be much more sensible. But really 100 loses? Are you still standing by that number? In 110 years of White Sox baseball that has happened maybe three times. And not in 40+ years. I think 90 loses and he's fine with some glimmer of hope. But 100 loses, there better be some really good reasons why they would play that poorly without some heads rolling. That would probably mean they are the worst team in baseball. And even with the trimming of the payroll, they still are higher than a lot of teams. You are talking historic worst season, not just a bad season. Wouldn't it be the worst season during JRs ownership? I agree that there needs to be some glimmer of improvement, but I doubt he can withstand a 100 loss season. 72-90 looks bad enough but 62-100 and keeps his job? I'm not certain you can lose 100 games and show improvement. But I doubt this team will lose 100 games, so the debate is kind of silly.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 7, 2012 -> 07:00 PM) If he gets fired this year, it would reflect very, very badly on ownership, IMO. After a 100 loss season!? One year removed from a season that you said was a different manager away from being a playoff team? The majority of fans here believe this is a .500 team. They go out and are a .333 team, they will lose fan support left and right, and JR will be forced to end the Williams era. It will reflect very badly on management if he doesn't fire his GM.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 7, 2012 -> 04:03 PM) If the Sox lose 100 games this year but Vicideo, Morel, and Beckham show promise in the 2nd half, and Sale gets to 150 innings while healthy, and Peavy and Dunn and Rios are traded, that is a successful year. Sure, and JR will reward the front office and Scouts with nice bonuses. They lose 100 games with a team that KW is 100% responsible for, he's gone.

I thought someone might think that which is why I added the sub title. My daily quote email mentioned his career start and I spent an hour or so reading some of his stuff.

Ever sportscaster who criticizes the Sox gets blasted. Cowley does it the most, so he gets blasted the most.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 7, 2012 -> 01:05 PM) That standard though cannot be wins and losses, not after $25 million in salary cuts. That standard is all about development and setting up for 2013. Wins and losses has to be part of the mix. That is one yardstick that the team is measured against. It isn't the only, or perhaps the best for this season, but it has to be in the mix.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 7, 2012 -> 11:08 AM) Is anyone else in favor of just one "Joe Cowley b****es about the White Sox" omnibus thread? Personally I am f***ing sick of the agenda, and would love to see it not pollute anymore threads than it has to The thread should be how responsible is Williams for this season and is his job on the line. So far that seemed to be the thread. I don't think it really matters who brings it up.