JUGGERNAUT

This debate is beyond your comprehension as you still believe that your the sole voice in what determines right & wrong. It's a typical liberal affliction.

QUOTE (JUGGERNAUT @ Jun 30 2004, 07:36 PM) A judge should only make things open to the public when the evidence is compelling. Either testimony under the consequence of perjury, criminal charges, or something that appears obvious. Allegations suggesting one or both were fans of 9 1/2 Weeks is hardly compelling evidence. Now either you are reading impaired or dishonest. There's my final word on the issue.

Speaking for the majority are we? Typical liberal move. You're wrong on all accounts & history has proven that to be the case. Apparently the term "the majority is always in a state of flux" is beyond your comprehension.

You can try. The majority is not determined by law but by strength in numbers. Or in this case the ability to bring a can of whoop ass to the event.

Now either you are reading impaired or dishonest. There's my final word on the issue quoted below. If you're going quote me then do it honestly & use the quote function.

Read what I said above. what you wrote is not what I said. Try using the quote function in it's entirety if this is difficult for you. If what you are saying is that America was not founded upon belief in democracy then you are wrong. I think it would do you good to expand your intelligence toward marco systems & macro viewpoints. The preamble might be a good place to start.

The majority is always right. When you learn that then you can debate democracy. There is no universal definition of right & wrong. What is right & what is wrong is ultimately defined by the behavior of the majority & that behavior is always in a state of flux. Like most other macro systems it maintains itself over time.

You're power & influence on this board prohibits me from responding because of the consequence of being banned. Since I care more about the SOX than this issue say what you will. I think this is safe: General principles do not arise from one personal event. It's foolish to think otherwise. They are formed by events that most effect the majority in a democracy.

More typical libertarian bulls***. I argue from a general-macro view with basic general principles & since they have none they always reply with specific personally driven instances. In answer to your question READ EVERY WORD I WROTE IN THE POST ABOVE on the subject. My answer is pretty clear.

Pure libertarian bulls***. That's what that is. Completely unrealistic & ldealic bulls***. Every social order on the planet whether it be humans, animals, or insects has a governing principle. Those who have greater power & influence over others dictate the social order. So it comes down to whether that power should lie in the hands of the majority or the select few. I'm a firm believer in democracy so I choose the majority. What you let loose for one you let loose for all. The more you let loose the more you move from order to chaos.

Clueless as usual. Ryan answered her allegations in the same court records. He was not going to call her a liar today because she holds the power over his custody rights today. So Ryan was basically crucified over allegations that were not made under the threat of perjury in the midst of a heated divorce battle. Whatever. If I think of it in the extreme sense that some of you do then the only people that will be fit for office will be people far more socially conservative than even myself. I guess that works in my favor then. Btw let's make sure than every minute of every day that Obama has lived is open to the public so we can see some dirt on him as well. Common sense tells us that everyone has skeletons in the closet. I don't think that should keep them from public office & I don't think that should be made public unless an event has a clear & unequivocal impact on policy decisions one might make. In other words, I could give a crap what Jeri or Jack did or said in there past. What matters is whether they think it's a good thing or a bad thing now. What matters is their moral conscience today. A judge should only make things open to the public when the evidence is compelling. Either testimony under the consequence of perjury, criminal charges, or something that appears obvious. Allegations suggesting one or both were fans of 9 1/2 Weeks is hardly compelling evidence. :fyou Judges !

I can't go a F'g month in this country without those damn F'g judges wrecking America! Read the US Constitution with respect to the judicial branch of government. Turn your F'g brain on when you do. There is a clear underlying theme in it. DON'T LEGISLATE FROM THE F'g BENCH! The bench is suppose to serve for a balance against GROSS & OBVIOUS violations of the US Constitution by Congress. The Child Protection Act & the right to treat Terrorists different than drug dealers DO NOT CONSTITUTE GROSS & OBVIOUS violations. They represent laws that the MAJORITY of Americans are in favor of!

:fyou judges! Tell the F'g truth once in a while & maybe you'll develop a F'g conscience. The law Clinton signed was a direct response to a growing problem at the time: adults were using underage porn to seduce minors into sex. The case that was brought to them had to deal with the ACLU representing those charged with those crimes. No where in the media reports is this even mentioned. They just lump porn all together. They could have struck down parts of the law that deal with non-underage porn & left those in place. But they have no F'g consciences to even bother.

By all means yes. Why not? Let's become a no-holds barred country. Terrorists can bomb the s*** out of us & hire Johnny Cocran to get them off. Let's legalize all drugs, prostitution, every form of sex immaginable. Let's remove God from everything in the public eye so we have no reminder of a conscience. Let's become the #1 nation in the world in sin, debauchery, & decadance. And best yet .. let's do it all under "rule of law". :fyou judges!

It will definitely be Jackson & none to soon

Apparently Wunsch has lost favor with Kenny so he's not coming back. I would have to believe his name is coming up in these trade talks. Or at least Kenny is including him. I'm not even sure if Kelly is still in the SOX org. He's got 10ip in AAA.

Then he should trade him. Successful LHers in the pen are valuable.

ESPN has him as a LH (I think that's right) & the SOX paid 1.4 million for him. So if he gets claimed the SOX save a little cash. I would think that means Wunsh is due back soon. Shingo, Marte, Cotts, Politte, Jackson, Adkins, Rauch, Diaz, Garland, E-Lo, Buehrle, Garcia With Schow & Wunsch coming back, Jackson & Adkins might the odd men out.

Bf, no one is saying it's time to enshrine Garcia but you have to admit the off-season surgery he had to fix a middle-ear balance problem has made a big difference. He's arguably the 3rd best pitcher in the AL right now. He wasn't that in the off-season & if the SOX were willing to part with 7 million they could have gotten he much cheaper in trade talent. But again his numbers before the surgery didn't really warrant that price. So all I'm saying is for his present value at the time the SOX need him the most (with SS on the DL) I don't think they SOX could have gotten him for less.

The intriguing thing about Kendall is his numbers suggest his SLG avg would improve greatly at the Cell. Everybody's SLG avg increases at the cell. His 419 career OBP would fit nicely on the SOX if or when they part with Thomas. We don't have too many guys with that kind of OBP. For 5 or 6 million a year for a C who can hit 310 w a 420 OBP I think that's a good buy.

Rowand still struggles against RHers. There's no way Harris/Rowand become the everyday CFer. Ozzie knows this & that's why they continue to platoon based on matchups. There's no way this is happening. Val is very signable to an extension & he's a fan favorite right now. He's given up switch hitting & is the strongest LH bat in the lineup. His value to the SOX right now is far above the value LA is willing to part with.

Giles is still signed thru 2007 at a much lower cost than Maggs. Any trade has to include Giles.

He's definitely over-stating the demise. The fact is the SOX have found a comfort level in pricing, admissions, & payroll. It seems to be the 60 million range. All of their revenue is going up in the years to come: better TV contract with Comcast, better radio deal with WMVP, & a city & state board commited to the success of the White Sox. I think that's a big part of the relationship with the White Sox & IL that no team in the ALC enjoys: we're all in this together. A more successful gate means the Sox pay rent on the stadium that tax payers fit the bill for. The state of IL is commited to making that happen. Revenue wise a return to a payroll in the 30-40 range is not likely no matter how the Twins fan thinks to spin the worst case scenario. All this team needs to do is win a few games in the post-season & I wouldn't put it past the current board to sell the team to Comcast while maintaining some shares. I think Comcast will be trying to buy this team every year of it's TV contract with the SOX because it makes good financial sense to do so. The other reason why I feel the Twins fan is grossly over-stating the demise is because he's ignoring how effective Williams has been in drafting talent & then grooming that talent. Williams is really shaping up to be one of the best talent evaluators in the league. I remain steadfast in my belief that Kenny has yet to let a game breaker get away from the SOX. Good players have left for greener pastures but not great ones.

One thing about the Garcia trade might make me :puke If it's inevitable consequence is that the Boss get Randy Johnson. I would :puke my guts all over the floor during every RJ start. That's like Luke joining Darth Vader to rule the evil empire. Say it ain't so? Anybody & everybody please don't let that happen!

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04181/339103.stm You guys blew it with Freddy Garcia. You let the Chicago White Sox beat you to him. I know you don't want that to happen again. Did you see my guy last night? Kris Benson was pretty good, wasn't he? I don't have to tell you that was a pretty good St. Louis lineup he shut down. That's five good starts in a row. I'm telling you, this guy can help you. You know my position here. It's no secret I've got to move him. Give me your best offer. I'd like to wrap this up by the weekend. Don't wait to get back to me. Don't be sorry. ============================== Something I want to say about Garcia. Some have suggested we could have gotten him for less earlier in the season or during the off-season. But I disagree. Freddy's 2003 stats were no where as good as they are right now. His record is meaningless. He has as many quality & winnable starts this year as any other ML pitcher. He's pitched as good or better than any one else. Steinbrenner is now saying nobody could beat Chicago's price. I doubt if he even knew who Olivo was before that trade & now he talks about him like a future all-star. We all know that mid-revenue teams are built through drafts & low-mid cost free agents. There is little expectation of keeping your own. The SOX have been consistently strong in drafting & bringing along OF talent. So Reed is not as a high a cost to this team as others. As for Morse, I think that's a bigger sign that the SOX will play try to resign Valentin to another extension. His popularity is at an all-time high amongst SOX fans & he's demonstrated the desire to give up a little $ to stay with the SOX. So Morse's biggest value was probably trade value to begin with. There are other prospects at SS in the SOX that expect to be ready when Val decides to retire. So it comes down to Miguel & Crede & I think most would agree that you want Crede around for his 2nd 1/2 power burst. When you look at it that way the SOX probably over-paid but if Garcia can win them a division crown who's gonna complain?