caulfield12

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 1, 2017 -> 08:13 AM) No you are ridiculous. Look at the photo. Barron just happened to be watching TV that 11 year olds watch and suddenly that popped up. . OK. And he thought it was his father? GMAB. All I said, and clearly you couldn't comprehend, is if Barron is going to be so sensitve, clearly parental controls should be used. I'm pretty sure this image wasn't on Cartoon Network. Everything Trump says and does is to benefit Trump. Lying has never been a problem. His story of it traumatizing Barron is BS. Besides, if things traumatize him, and Barron has full access, why does Donald act the way he does? The guy isn't even a father. He has stated the only responsibility he has as a father is to supply funds. The President lying is something quite common. It's pretty logical to think he would lie about this. Where are the posts with your outrage when Obama was in a noose? Where's the outrage from women, especially Republicans, about this...? https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/alarming-expos...-131526565.html [A visitor to one of Trump’s homes, late into Melania’s pregnancy, recalls him remarking that he agreed to the baby on the condition that Melania would get her body back. “She promised him that everything would go back to the way it was,” says this guest; it struck this person as a “contract.” And he was simply rude to her. “There was no ‘How do you feel?’ No opening of doors, making sure she didn’t fall. Just ‘You wanted to have a baby.’” ([Trump spokesperson Stephanie Grisham] counters that Mr. Trump was “very warm and supportive throughout her pregnancy.”) He never even really wanted a fifth child, but it's pretty apparent reading the tea leaves there was going to be no marriage without one (from Melania's viewpoint.) But now that Barron can be used as a convenient prop....despite the argument they wanted to protect him by keeping him with his mother in NYC, it seems crazy that someone isn't controlling his t.v. time since it had to happen at night (supposedly) as school is in session still. So where was his mother or nanny to supervise him if they already knew the "truly horrifying" Griffin images were out there?

I thought you'd already know given your arguments. I have been taking your greater point here as that we need to mandate governmental health care because there are poor people. Essentially, so there are no situations where an uninsured poor person ends up in the hospital with insurmountable bills and can't get care. I get that your heart is in it and I applaud you. My point is that this is more of a business/operational issue than humanity issue. The business operates in a way so that we don't need the humanitarian efforts. The uninsured and poor get covered when they themselves can't cover it. It's fixed into the industry. This is the fundamental difference between Republicans and Democrats. The Democratic argument is that it's a fundamental responsibility of government to keep the people of a country as healthy as possible...with better family health leading to better parenting leading to each succeeding generation attaining higher educational levels and more success (at least theoretically). The problem is at least four-fold...those people who don't have the money to pay 1) going bankrupt/family breakdown/divorce as a result of medical bills, 2) family breakdown because of the opioid crisis, not enough funds for treatment/counseling, 3) not being able to pay results in either higher insurance premiums or higher government reimbursements, which come out of tax revenues and mean funding from SOMEWHERE else has to be cut or taxes have to be raised and 4) the incalculable long-term costs of families being hesitant to go to the doctor until the health situation has degenerated into an ER room type of situation, which leads to even more expensive treatments and often deaths that could have been prevented. Health care costs here in China are CONSIDERABLY lower per person because so much money is invested in preventive care, stressing a healthy diet (no soda for kids!) with lots of vegetables and rice/noodles...maintaining a lifestyle leading to a longer life and less health care issues. The US system tends to be MUCH more REACTIVE. And obviously surgeries like aortic bypass will carry the highest price tag possible.

BITCOIN? Josh Hamilton, Pujols, Nolasco, Garrett Richards (injured) and Huston Street are really soaking up a ton of payroll. That's $80 million just for 2017 alone (those five), and that's not counting another $20 million for Trout. Which is why their payroll is around $150 million, with very few places to cut.

The only concern I'd have (were I a DBacks' fan) is how they're going to be able to afford to improve their current roster. Despite their record, the last couple of seasons especially being massive disappointments (see Shelby Miller deal and collapse of the LaRussa/Dave Stewart regime), the sterling records of the Dodgers/Giants...it has inevitably watered demand for their tickets down to the bottom 25% of MLB franchises. But, as you mentioned, to pull the rug out from under the fans who've suffered over the last 5 years or so would be a death blow to them in all likelihood.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/forget-trumps-bl...-090001198.html Forget Trump’s bluster. The world is walking all over him. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/activist-pro...-060909898.html Three activists looking into unfair labor allegations at one of Ivanka Trump's contracted Chinese shoe factories "detained and/or missing." This is where FOX NEWS would blurt out a headline..."murdered/disappeared/kidnapped" by a nefarious and far-reaching left wing network of child labor exploiters, etc. Had this been a vendor/supplier that produced goods for the Clinton Foundation, Chelsea, etc., surely there would be a HUGE HUGE uproar. Human rights violations in China!!! Once a lecturer on this issue, HRC has mysteriously gone soft. Clintons look the other way after the Chinese government finally provides them the patents to protect "Clinton-branded" luxury clothing from being pirated/copied. Chinese sovereign wealth fund donates hundreds of millions to Clinton Foundation, allegations of "shady uranium deals" via a back channel with the Canadian government and money funneled back to Chelsea and her husband to maintain a Madoff-esque pyramid scheme bilking clients out of their lifetime savings.

This is a MUCH more constructive discussion, IMO. Let's keep in mind that 58% of live births in the United States over the last 2-3 years had full/partial reimbursement through the Medicaid program as well. It's a massive number of aid recipients. Rabbit, here are three potential answers to your question. I haven't had a chance to read through them all. http://www.pantagraph.com/news/national/tr...1a4bcf887a.html Trauma in the ER: Who pays for the uninsured? http://health.howstuffworks.com/medicine/g...t-insurance.htm What happens if you go to the ER and don't have insurance? https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/...someone_doesnt/ How does it work in America when someone doesn't have health insurance?

As the Senate rewrites the American Health Care Act (AHCA), the GOP’s bill to repeal Obamacare, the RAND Corporation released a new, in-depth report about chronic disease—a matter central to the health insurance debates. According to the report, people with five or more chronic conditions – which constitutes 12% of the population – accounted for 41% of total healthcare spending in 2014, the latest year of data. Adding people with three to five chronic conditions, these two groups constitute 28% of the population and account for 67% of spending. On the other end, 71% of the population, with two or fewer conditions, make up just 33% of total healthcare expenditures in the United States. The RAND Corporation’s report, which was done in conjunction with FightChronicDisease.org, paints a picture of a fairly standard insurance model: a large group subsidizes the other, smaller group, which uses more resources. This is the KEY part, IMO. In effect, these premium declines (predicted to be in the neighborhood of 20%) come out of two basic changes. The first is simple: fewer services cost less—though perhaps not for everybody because benefits like maternal care, substance abuse among others would run up a pretty big bill, and quickly. But the other factor comes from simply how insurance works. A group of people pay dues so that if something bad happens, the fund will help pay for them. If you take out the people who draw on the account – in this case, sicker people – the pool doesn’t need as much money and premiums go down. Besides pointing out who pays for whom, the RAND Corporation study colored debate around the CBO score and preexisting conditions by showing just how thin the line is between having one and not having one. According to the findings, six in 10 adult Americans had at least one chronic condition in 2014. Four in 10 had more than one. Chronic conditions aren’t necessarily preexisting conditions. (52 million adults have preexisting conditions today, touching 53% of households, according to a survey from Kaiser Family Foundation.) But as the editor-in-chief of Kaiser Health News Elisabeth Rosenthal wrote in a recent New York Times op-ed, the pre- and perhaps post-ACA landscape had insurers deciding to lower the bar for what a preexisting condition could be. This article does a pretty decent job of summarizing the problem succinctly. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/study-shows-...-205859200.html

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 31, 2017 -> 10:02 PM) I don't know that the market was necessarily that great beyond Boston. It was a limited market for starting pitching both on the supply and demand side. New York is in quasi-rebuilding mode and I don't think Cashman was or maybe even still is ready to go out and add a marquee starting pitcher. The Pirates showed interest but when was the last time they spend anything significant on a starting pitcher other than as a high 1st round draft pick? Houston seemed most logical this offseason, but they had every reason to look into letting their current guys go - they were, frankly, about 8 deep in their rotation, even if they were not great options beyond about #3. They're on pace to win 114 games, so I think they have been justified thus far in waiting. They still seem like a good option should Quintana turn things around, and I don't doubt that he will. Beyond those 3, who else was going to be buyers for Quintana? Atlanta was in the same boat as New York and Colorado was tepid, as they should have been. Looking at teams that could have been in play, the Cubs were overconfident in their World Series winning rotation, Cleveland would probably have to had to pay a premium, Seattle wasn't interested in anything other than much more than back of the rotation filler, the Angels still couldn't get Quintana with their system, the Nationals had a pretty loaded rotation to with which to begin...and I really don't see any other matches. The Sox may have overvalued Quintana, but I don't think Hahn is the kind of guy who would shy away from something that was close. I genuinely think teams were looking to acquire Quintana at the price of a cost controlled or #3 starter or a rental #2 starter. Quintana should not be valued as such. The Dodgers had the prospects but seemingly not the willingness to part with the top ones, especially in light of substituting Forsythe for Dozier. That was supposedly for JUST one elite pitching prospect (with a little glimmer off)...of course, they were looking at a rental situation with Dozier as well. Cardinals were a name we bandied around quite a bit. Brewers, too early in their rebuild. The Yankees seemingly need some "predictability" with the season that Tanaka's having so far, but it's not much different than what Jose Quintana has provided the White Sox. Colorado is looking to buy, sell or stand pat? Cargo's having a garbage season. What about DBacks? Try to dump Greinke? (Of course the other problem Hahn is going to have to deal with is all those teams like the Mets, Royals, Angels with Trout down, the Tigers are likely to be looking to unload...the AL bunched up like a lot of us predicted, but not necessarily the most favorable teams for us to be competing with in terms of putting talent on the market. Another good example is the Rays, do they clean house and try to deal Archer/Odorizzi/Andriese/Cobb, Longoria, etc.?) Orioles never had the matching prospects. And then you have the A's (holding Gray) and the Rangers with Darvish/Hamels if they feel they can't hang in there for the wildcard (Gallo has resurrected himself, Mazara about the same, Odor struggling and Profar completely off the map again.) Also, in retrospect the Nats deal seemed to be an overpay (based on comments by guys like Bryce Harper alone)....but the Red Sox deal for Sale always felt "one half" player short in that they couldn't pry away Benintendi, Devers, Groome. That would have been a truly incredible deal for the Sox, though.

QUOTE (turnin' two @ May 31, 2017 -> 02:44 PM) Bregman is breaking out currently. I believe he has 5 homers in the last 2 weeks, including one today. 6 in his last 17 games

Huge generation gap on this one. Those who grew up and started following the White Sox in the 80's and 90's, we mostly love Hawk (minus running off LaRussa/Leyland and his foray into GM'ing). The Millennials on this board are more willing to give Benetti a chance...so pretty much everyone early 30's and younger is in that camp. Of course, some are in neither camp and realize it was time for Hawk to go but also aren't completely enamored with Benetti, either. Personally, when I think back of all the great moments in the last 30 years or so, his voice is the soundtrack. Behind that is probably John Rooney when he was doing the games with Wayne Hagin in the late 80's and I listened to nearly every Sox game on WMAQ (especially at night with that booming signal). I can honestly say that Benetti will never be that same "childhood voice" that stays with me for the rest of my life. That's just the way it is...all of his catch phrases and "Hell, Yeah's" (more recent) and umpire barbs and sullen silences, he's about as close to the "common" White Sox fan in temperament as you'll ever get. And that's something we will never get from a "professional/modern day" announcer like Benetti.

What did Politifact determine was the "objective" percentage of time Trump's actually factual in his statements? Around 20-25% I have no difficulty believing the whole story was fabricated to garner sympathy and turn everyone more against Kathy Griffin. Trump LOVES being a bully. And it's much easier to pick on those celebrities like Rosie O'Donnell or Griffin that nobody likes. Notice Trump all this time never jumped on Melissa McCarthy for her impression of Sean Spicer. That would be a losing argument with the public. And we didn't get the decapitated Obama (the UNIV of Wisconsin students did have nooses at the basketball game with their effigies)...but we get THIS predictably instead. A noose was found at the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, DC on Wednesday, the museum said in a statement. This is the second incident in the last week of a noose being found on Smithsonian properties. http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/31/us/african-a...oose/index.html

Still would have been a DP had they walked Anderson. Got away with facing the red hot Timmy. Oh, well. Sox catchers with RISP this season is the like the days of "bad" Tyler Flowers and Mark Johnson.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 31, 2017 -> 03:19 PM) Olerud career slash 295/398/465 roughly Smoak 213/310/405 Hosmer is closer but lesser. Smoak isn't same atmosphere. Olerud gets thrown around a ton, but its likely he is the absolute ceiling, not the likely comp. This year's version of Smoak, which seems to be an anomaly in an Avi Garcia type of way.

Bunt Davidson, bunt Davidson... Just missed it, lol. At least it wasn't a DP. If I'm the Red Sox, I walk Anderson to load the bases and get Kevan Smith to roll into a DP. Smith will hit a three run jack here just to mess with us.

QUOTE (ptatc @ May 31, 2017 -> 07:34 PM) This as well as limiting lawsuits are actually the two most important thing to drive costs down. The fact of the matter is that hospitals are charging people (entering an ER without insurance) four times as much as the going Medicare rate. That's crazy. Until you also do something to limit hospital charges, as well as the profit margins of pharmaceutical companies and the insurance industry, you're going to inevitably have rising health care costs. There's also a lot of conflicting evidence about cross-border shopping not leading to the automatic "slam dunk" competition gains that many Republicans are banking on. Tort reform? Sure, as long as you don't rebalance the equation so much that patients lose their rights and doctors/hospitals are insulated too much (think of it as the equivalent of those on the right shouting about teacher's unions and lifetime tenure)...there has to be a compromise available in the middle. (Of course, the idea of limiting the "freedom" of lawyers to sue and earn as much money as possible from potential lawsuits goes against the American capitalistic system as well...although it often conflicts, because the victims of those lawsuits are often multinational corporations, so the Dems side with the lawyers and the GOP with the corporations and everyone loses in some way, shape or form.)

ALL OF THIS WAS A DIRECT RESULT OF THAT STUPID BUNT THE INNING BEFORE...WHITE SOX GO AHEAD 2-0, the entire game changes in complexion. Blow the opportunity, you ALMOST always give up runs the next inning. This is not the NL. The AL teams just have way too much firepower to play small ball like it's 2005 the first two months. Starting to think the Cubs were right on Renteria....he's like Torborg/Manuel, good managers at working with youngsters but NOT the right man to lead them to the promised land. (But at least he played a major role in getting Luis Robert and will be around until the beginning of the 2019 season or halfway through that year.)

White Sox getting killed with two out rallies these last two games....Swarzak finally returning back to earth, with no help from Leury and a wild pitch. 2.63 ERA

At least we can't micromanage and bring in Jennings or Holmberg here. Swarzak up to 1.88. KC getting nervous that Sandoval will start to hit and they will lose a potential trading partner for Moustakas, likewise with the White Sox and Todd Frazier.

At least no Travis to kill us in this game. Walking JBJ JR to get to Rutledge.

By Pelfrey, to boot. That's the way it usually goes. If he was facing the Astros or Yankees tonight, they'd put up 7 or 8 on him. But, in the law of baseball where idiotic managing leads to a runner not scoring from second and no outs, the NEXT half inning invariably leads to a run/s scoring for the opposition. It's like the leadoff walks are more likely to score than singles adage.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ May 31, 2017 -> 07:56 PM) Basabe is super young for his league and made huge progress in the 2nd half of last year. I'm not overly concerned at this point. And honestly, when you get arguably the highest ceiling positional & pitching prospects in all of the minors as headliners, I'm ok with a toolsy OF and an interesting relief prospect as the secondary pieces. Actually, I would argue 3 of the Top 5, if you include Luis Robert. Would put Gleyber Torres in there as well, and not including Bellinger since he's quickly losing rookie status.

QUOTE (maxjusttyped @ May 31, 2017 -> 07:48 PM) If Kahnle is still rocking a 50% K% in July I think the Sox will do very well if they decide to deal him. 2017 Contract Status: Pre-Arb Eligible Service Time (01/2017): 2.015 • Arb Eligible: 2018 • Free Agent: 2021 Or deal Nate Jones first, because of his contract being relatively more expensive, and his propensity to get injured. It's a very tough call...if the White Sox believe all of his changes are going to take, holding onto him to create a "superpen" along with Burdi and Lopez/Giolito/Fulmer (at least one of them won't make it as a starter) makes a lot of sense if you look at that Royals/Indians model of bullpen management where the goal of every starter is to get the ball to the pen after the 6th.

QUOTE (soxfan49 @ May 31, 2017 -> 07:49 PM) If Leury Garcia ends this year with a .700 OPS would that actually be a bad thing? Nope, depending on the number of at-bats he receives, that's a 1.5-2 WAR contribution, similar to Saladino last year...maybe a notch below that. His pinch running ability is an asset, as well as his positional flexibility.

Why are you bunting with freakin' PELFREY on the mound? It's not like this is Game 7 of the ALCS, and you're playing for one run with Sale on the mound and the 2005 White Sox bullpen lined up behind him. That made no sense...zero, unless he simply did it on his own.

Impressed that Leury went into a bit of a slump there and is fighting to get out of it....thought he was headed for his predicted low 700's OPS sooner rather than later.