caulfield12

Well, at least Thad is persistent/consistent in his messaging.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Feb 22, 2017 -> 08:28 PM) When it comes to any potential trade of Robertson, Frazier or Quintana the red flags come out when you hear "just take what you can get" or "settle for the best they offer.". We don't have to short change ourselves. Trade partners are dealing because they need to win this season. We don't and so we get what we want or we hold our cards. If we got Severino for Robertson where does that leave our own stud young catcher? Is there really room for two premium catching prospects? I wouldn't worry too much about having TOO MUCH catching talent after the last five years of White Sox baseball. These things usually have a way of working themselves out...and we've always speculated that if Collins' hit tool is good enough, it would be easy to imagine him getting a fair amount of at-bats at DH to rest him from all the wear and tear you take at catcher.

He would fit in as one of the Amish/Mennonite bowlers in Kingpin...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/22/europe/europ...licy/index.html Can Europe really take the high moral ground on the refugee crisis?

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/201...-adviser-214804 Trump has done two things so far to nearly universal acclaim, the Gorsuch nomination and now McMaster. A close third would probably be Mad Dog Mattis. With all the conflicts brewing in the world (at least half self-inflicted), how likely are the Dems to try to convince a military leader to run on their ticket? Is this something that the left (Sanders/Wellstone) wing of the Democratic Party would even be willing to tolerate? With the lack of foreign policy credentials and military backgrounds from most modern Dems, would you at least be willing to support a ticket with a military leader as the VP candidate? Are you concerned the Trump administration is becoming too militaristic and those experienced generals/military leaders will goad him into engagements that a more seasoned president would have been able to avoid? Or do you follow the theory that Bannon/Miller/Trump are just itching for a way to "prove" themselves and make history by waging a war somewhere? If you look at all these issues like border security, immigration, policing/law & order, Iran, Syria, Russia, North Korea, China...it certainly lends itself to a credible argument from both sides of the political aisle (fear the military advisors are too strong a presence if you're a Republican, fear from the left that we have to trust the military to serve as a buffer to prevent Trump/Bannon from doing something truly cataclysmic for the world). Another reason is simply the fact that citizenry around the world tends to feel more comfortable with stronger authority (not necessarily authoritarian) leaders in historical eras of uncertainty/peril.

Trump has his (in)famous statement about being able to shoot someone on 5th Avenue in NYC in broad daylight and being able to get away with it...talking about pedophilia/sexual abuse/molestation, even jokingly, one of the automatic third rails.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/21/opinions/dhs...eyes/index.html A nation of immigrants entering a dark chapter http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/tr...unexpected-turn A week before Michael T. Flynn resigned as national security adviser, a sealed proposal was hand-delivered to his office, outlining a way for President Trump to lift sanctions against Russia. Mr. Flynn is gone, having been caught lying about his own discussion of sanctions with the Russian ambassador. But the proposal, a peace plan for Ukraine and Russia, remains, along with those pushing it: Michael D. Cohen, the president’s personal lawyer, who delivered the document; Felix H. Sater, a business associate who helped Mr. Trump scout deals in Russia; and a Ukrainian lawmaker trying to rise in a political opposition movement shaped in part by Mr. Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort. The “Ukrainian lawmaker,” in this case, is Andrii Artemenko, who’s allied with Putin’s government.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 21, 2017 -> 10:27 AM) Not to validate what the blind followers are saying here, but I would make a distinction here. I think there is a lot of organic anger that had led to an ease of organization of events like this. I do fully believe that the organization and planning of these events isn't random and that there is a paid work being done at the top levels to keep people angry and engaged through the elections. And how is that any different from the Tea Party or Newt Gingrich's Contract with America in 1994-95? The Grover Norquist Effect as well? Were those all organic or simply manifestations of Koch Industries operatives masquerading as populist movements but professionally planned and funded? The closest you're going to get to that is Occupy Wall Street...because it never had a leadership structure or even an agreed-upon set of policy goals. And a fair amount of the Republican "outrage" has been funded by the insurance/medical/Big Pharma industry exerting pressure behind-the-scenes. 60% of the country being roundly against a president is unprecedented. Yet the polarization of across the board level of support from that 40% is nearly unprecedented as well, especially in "peacetime."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/21/politics/don...port/index.html An interesting, albeit scary read. These Republicans are now even MORE for Trump than when they voted for him in November. When it came time to vote, Republicans were as loyal to their party as Democrats were to theirs. And now, they are standing solidly behind Trump, even as his approval rating is the lowest of any new president in modern times. Trump's 40% approval rating is 21 points below average for a president finishing his first month in office, while his 87% approval rating among Republicans is second only to that of George W. Bush among all GOP presidents elected in the last 65 years, Gallup reported Friday.

There's no evidence that the Obama administration was anything but caught in a predicament by Snowden and the reporters who dumped all those documents...clearly the government wasn't going to reward them for potentially putting many lives at risk. There's certainly a stronger argument that unfiltered document dump was more dangerous than granting visas to Muslims originating in the seven ban countries. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Greenwald Regarding civil liberties during the Obama presidency, he elaborated on his conception of change when he said, "I think the only means of true political change will come from people working outside of that [two-party electoral] system to undermine it, and subvert it, and weaken it, and destroy it; not try to work within it to change it."[73] He did, however, raise money for Russ Feingold's 2010 Senate re-election bid,[74] Bill Halter's 2010 primary challenge to Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln,[75] as well as several Congressional candidates in 2012 described as "unique".[76] Greenwald is critical of Israel's foreign policy and influence on U.S. politics,[77] a stance for which he has in turn been the subject of criticism,[78][79] which successively elicited some criticism towards those authors.[80] According to Greenwald, the emergence of ISIS is a direct consequence of the Iraq War and NATO-led military intervention in Libya.[81][82][83] Greenwald has criticized U.S. and U.K. involvement in Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen.[84] He wrote in October 2016: "The atrocities committed by the Saudis would have been impossible without their steadfast, aggressive support."[85] Alan Dershowitz is far from a spokesman for liberals or Obama. Note that quote came from the Washington Times, which is fake news just like the NY Post or NY Observer. From Breitbart's Wikipedia entry On the night of February 29, 2012, Breitbart collapsed suddenly while walking in Brentwood. He was rushed to Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, where he was pronounced dead just after midnight.[46][47] He was 43 years old. An autopsy by the Los Angeles County Coroner's Office showed that he had hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, with focal coronary atherosclerosis,[48] and died of heart failure.[49] He was buried in the Jewish plot at the Hillside Memorial Park Cemetery. His grave is marked with the inscription "Herein lies a giant." Unproven conspiracy theories arose about his death.[50][51][52] The toxicology report showed, "No prescription or illicit drugs were detected. The blood alcohol was .04%. No significant trauma was present and foul play is not suspected."[49] Bill Whittle, a personal friend of Breitbart, had said that Breitbart had a "serious heart attack" just months before his death.[53] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-poli...N0HI23820140923 Conspiracy Theory #3 D'Souza, a frequent critic of U.S. President Barack Obama, admitted in May to illegally reimbursing two "straw donors" who donated $10,000 each to the unsuccessful 2012 U.S. Senate campaign in New York of Wendy Long, a Republican he had known since attending Dartmouth College in the early 1980s. "It was a crazy idea, it was a bad idea," D'Souza told Berman before being sentenced. "I regret breaking the law." Prosecutors had sought a 10-to 16-month prison sentence, rejecting defense arguments that D'Souza was "ashamed and contrite" about his crime and deserved probation with community service. D'Souza, 53, was (instead) ordered by U.S. District Judge Richard Berman in Manhattan to live in a center (like a nicer halfway house), which would allow him to leave during non-residential hours for employment, for the first eight months of a five-year probationary period. Berman also ordered D'Souza to perform one day of community service a week during probation, undergo weekly therapy and pay a $30,000 fine. Where's the smoke, let alone a fire?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 20, 2017 -> 05:26 PM) The bolded is complete and utter bulls***. Let's take the specific example in this case. First and foremost, I'm going to ignore the fact that you seem to think he's unimportant when the President of the United States has tweeted about him personally and when he's editor of the "news source" that the President's closest advisor runs, which makes him newsworthy anyway, but let's just focus on the specific sequence. In December, this person stood up on stage, published personal information about a transgendered person at the University of Wisconsin. After that, although we don't have all the details, some combination of identity theft and threats happened to that person. That person was forced to leave the University of Wisconsin. He has found a creative way around the law. It's illegal to yell fire in a crowded room, but he's realized that if he yells the "Fi" and has 10,000 people trained to yell the "RE" part, then he will not be prosecuted for encouraging a riot and when there are 10,000 people who each commit a small portion of the crime, law enforcement agencies will be overwhelmed and unable to prosecute. He is actually hurting people and this is his schtick. It isn't just this case, that's one example, go all the way back to GamerGate and that was his thing - outing people who he believes deserves to be hurt. Hell, that's his literal defense against being labeled a pedophile today, "I'm not a pedophile, I outed people who were pedophiles!" In this thread you have stated "The guy's notoriety has blown up because of young liberal's inability to allow people with differing opinions freedom of speech because the guy is, by their account, a Nazi." In other words, you believe it is a problem when people actually stand up against someone DOING ACTUAL HARM to the lives of people. The problem you choose to call out is not that he is actually hurting people, it's that people stand up and say they don't want harm done to people. A few posts later you then state "Never understood the American ideal of supporting one party and compromising my beliefs on certain issues because of my affiliation to a party and social club." Ok, great. So why exactly did he get your attention other than him being a part of a social club that you felt compelled to defend? Either you had to wait until the person in your social club was hurt or you do not consider the people he hurt before that to be worth your defense. You had nothing to say when he was going around actually hurting people, but the moment his right to paid speaking engagements at a university where he has demonstrated he will actually hurt people in that community was violated, you stepped in to say how inappropriate it was. You were ok with him hurting people as long as the groups he was hurting were not powerful enough for you to be forced to pay attention to it. You criticize a guy for going on Maher's show when Maher said other things and then getting outraged here. Your point is arguably correct. But then you criticize sheep on the left for actually stepping in to defend people who don't have the power to defend themselves. So why is this person worthy of your defense when a person outed for being transgender is not? Why is it such an outrage to you that a community like UC Berkeley would actually step forwards and defend the rights of their underprivileged students to not be harmed, but it isn't an outrage to you when he actually does harm to them in a way that cannot currently be prosecuted? I'm not sure that should be construed as a compliment, although I suppose it was intended to validate him in a way. For example, Tomi Lahren has "blown up" in the last 18 months, but what are the reasons? Well, she's blonde, fairly attractive and can sometimes come across as halfway articulate about the world of politics, but is that what our world is actually coming to...that our standards have fallen so far in terms of expectations of the press/media? At least she's more in the "sheep" category, and it's hard to even accuse her of that, because she's going to make a good amount of money being "used" by the system. It's reciprocal. The same thing applies to Milos or Alex Jones, but in a much more insidious way...in that they're actually dangerous (as pointed out), but they've figured out a way to game the system and come so close to that boundary of being prosecuted (of course, they feel even more protected now with Trump in office)...that they can turn around and cry wolf and use those examples of violence/protest to turn around and raise significant amounts of money in a knee-jerk reaction way (he's being denied his First Amendment rights!) The worst thing for him would be for the crowd to ignore him or listen politely and make not a single comment, or refuse to engage with him...and for no media attention to come about due to that interaction. So it's obvious he's successful at baiting certain groups on college campuses and getting those inflammatory reactions he so craves...which then creates another cycle (rinse and repeat) of being denied the right to speak and then turning around to write another book or fundraise. That's the scary part about any attempt to impeach Trump too early. First, Pence. Second, you have to have the RIGHT case to go forward with, and there's probably 100 different things you could choose, but there's no "smoking gun" as of yet that's compelling enough to get Republicans to cross the aisle. As it stands now, the GOP can use all these protests and town hall disruptions and anti-media conspiracy stuff to fund think tanks for years on end. Of course, so can the the ACLU, so you end up having a state of perpetual warfare and insults being lobbed back and forth, because it sells in the media, more than compromise and working together across party lines.

Trump aides covering up or lying/obfuscating about his amount of time spent golfing... http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/20/politics/don...ency/index.html

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/11/sorry-trum...-exist-anymore/ We've been over this territory numerous times. Trump isn't bringing "good jobs" back...right now, there are hundreds of thousands of unfilled service jobs that Trump voters look down their noses at. Who do those jobs go to now? Largely legal and some illegal immigrants...just like the value-added tech jobs are mostly going to Indian and Chinese H1B visa holders who are asked to work for 50 cents on the dollar (this one not KW's doing). They have better STEM educations and are willing to work 2-3x as hard. So opportunities will be there under Trump, just not for the people he promised or those who largely voted for him in the Rust Belt. Only the huge MNC's and Top 10% will continue to thrive (and see their investment income skyrocket.)

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/dont-tel...-161200401.html FOX News even pushing back, last week Shepard Smith and this weekend Chris Wallace "Reince, here's the problem. I don't have any problem with you complaining about an individual story. We sometimes get it wrong, you guys sometimes get it wrong. I don't have any problem with you complaining about bias," Wallace said. "But the president went a lot further than that. He said that the 'fake media,' not certain stories, the 'fake media,' are an enemy to the country. We don't have a state-run media in this country. That's what they have in dictatorships," Wallace continued. Priebus argued that "other cable stations, not necessarily Fox," only briefly covered events like Trump's meetings with foreign leaders and announcement of the president's Supreme Court nominee, saying outlets instead focused on ties between Russia and the Trump campaign "all day long, on every chyron, every seven minutes." "As soon as it was over, the next 20 hours is all about Russian spies, how no one gets along, how nothing's happening. Give me a break," Priebus said. "You don't get to tell us what to do, Reince. You don't get to tell us what to do any more than Barack Obama did. Barack Obama whined about Fox News all the time, but I've got to say, he never said we were an enemy of the people," Wallace replied. After Priebus said he was "surprised" Wallace would forget "all the shots" that Obama took at Fox News, the anchor interjected. "He took the shots, and we didn't like them, and frankly, we don't like this either. But he never went as far as President Trump has. And that's what's concerning. Because it seems like he crosses a line when he says that we're the enemy of the people," Wallace said.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/18/opinions/geo...ance/index.html Takei:Echoes of Japanese WWII Internment in Today's Political Environment http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/17/politics/epa...il_topeditorial EPA criticizes itself? That will surely boost the morale of the scientific community... http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ferris-buell...-212616027.html Donald Trump should watch Ben Stein in Ferris Bueller on tariffs/protectionism...aka the innocuous-sounding "border adjustment tax" http://sports.yahoo.com/news/hey-everyone-...-222937229.html Kylie Irving leaving the Cavs to head up NASA under Trump?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/17/opinions/tru...itis/index.html Why Trump wants you to hate the media http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/nati...er-chaos-235162 “People are so overwhelmed," said one distraught former official who recently stepped down from the NSC and spoke on condition of anonymity. "They’re all in survival mode. Everyone is expecting to get fired any minute." The source said those responsible for regional issues like Europe and Middle East are the only ones preparing briefing reports and other material for Trump’s phone calls and visits with world leaders. “Plenty of people are sitting at their desks staring at blank screens," the former official added. “Right now it is apocalyptic. These are people who have been doing this for years who are professionals and who know how the system works. And now there is this complete lack of competence and understanding of the system and complete lack of desire to learn it, if not outright hostility.” Then there is the simple reality that Trump has virtually no national security or foreign policy experience. "This president more than most will have a learning curve," Rostow said. "The job is hard enough enough as it is."

Why not Buerhle, AJ, Pods and Rowand? Or the entire 2005 team photo? Or Thome/Konerko/Dye?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 17, 2017 -> 03:05 PM) Trump Team’s Growth Forecasts Far Rosier Than Those of CBO, Private Economists http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/17/politics/til...keup/index.html Tillerson presides over abrupt shakeup at the State Dept. https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...src=twsrc%5Etfw Where's the Washington Post and MSNBC? You're slipping! The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People! Hispanic Caucus barred from ICE meeting by Ryan https://www.yahoo.com/news/rep-gutierrez-ac...-162250136.html My own comment: They've already killed the Paul Ryan border adjustment tax, which would have cost consumers $1.2-1.7 trillion but gained the govt revenues to at least partially offset the tax gains going to the mostly top 10% and big multinationals. The problem is those tax cuts (rates down, corporate down, incentives to repatriate offshore profits) are going to cost another $3 trillion. That's not even considering the border wall, increased military spending and infrastructure plans. So to think GDP growth will jump to 4-5%, more than doubling....when you have all the disruptions to the health care system forthcoming, to immigration/transportation by putting out another EO, deportations of millions theoretically, various protests disrupting workplaces, it's impossible to imagine. But surely it will be based on the jump in the stock market and extrapolated to the GDP growth numbers.

The hardest part with a 23 month old is balancing overprotectiveness with the opposite instinct to let them learn how to fall and pick themselves up. It's still mostly gestures, as the vocab is limited a bit...partly because English is his second language, primary is Chinese. But you can really see and feel the growing cleverness at about 1 1/2 years. He really loves police cars, wheels, anything technical like air conditioners, fans, remote controls, phones...and his Italian scooter, which will soon be replaced by a tricycle. We also just bought him a pan drum to develop the musical side but he's not quite patient enough yet. He has a lot of children's books but he wants to hold them and turn the pages himself instead of listening to the stories for very long. When we play with any type of ball, he throws with both hands so I'm envisioning him as a future loogy, haha. The thing that freaks me out is his running everywhere and how quickly he can get away if you're not paying attention...especially targeting any escalator going the wrong direction. He will cross his fingers a lot and point and you wonder if that's normal. Then the doctors said he had flat feet but everything I read about shoe inserts and orthotics says to wait until at least 4-5 for any intervention.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 16, 2017 -> 06:52 PM) ISIS just killed 75 people in a bombing, yet not a single word from El Presidente. Probably cause the victims were all Muslims? The opposite. Probably just the excuse he needs to put more American boots on the ground and have a "Wag the Dog" small-scale distraction war with Mattis leading the charge...he has to be BEGGING for ANY excuse not to talk to the media about all the questions he refuses to address, which simply continue to fester. The cycle keeps repeating as the media smells blood in the water. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/02/don...achable-offense Did Donald Trump just commit an impeachable offense?

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/02...erence-2-16-17/ Jake Tapper really becoming a voice of reason...did Trump actually threaten to blow the Russian ship out of the water to distract everyone? And then another immigration ban next week?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/politics/pen...yria/index.html Pentagon/Mattis to consider more combat troops in Syria...and away we go.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 15, 2017 -> 02:11 PM) Something is very wrong with Donald J. Trump's brain 1) I "allowed" my daughter to marry a Jewish person and she EVEN changed her religion for him (and my grandchildren). Amazing people! 2) Since my son-in-law Jared Kushner's Jewish (he used to be a Democrat too, like me!) and he's my key advisor on all things related to Israel and the Middle East (just not anything to do with terrorism, in fact, I specifically waited until the Sabbath started on Friday to surprise them with the whole travel ban thingie), I can't possibly be prejudiced/biased/anti-Semitic.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/politics/top...tion/index.html Isakson, Tim Scott, Murkowski, Collins...were the four who publicly came out against Puzder. As many as 8 others were considering jumping ship.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/15/media/stev...ebus/index.html Bannon complaining about Breitbart being unfair, what?