caulfield12

Only 2/3 wives...Czech Republic and Slovenia. Marla Maples, not a Communist! Maybe that's why they attempted to hide Tiffany?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-wants-form...--election.html Picking Russia critic Coats as intelligence chief is either brilliant PR or insanity

So Russia hacked into the GOP and didn't release anything detrimental to Trump. Hmmm... They specifically launched their propaganda campaign to shore up support after the Billy Bush tape was leaked...when nobody thought he could win and there was quite a bit of talk about replacing him on the ticket. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationw...1124-story.html There were 213 million views of "fake news" attacking Clinton and her campaign. Then you had the FBI October Surprise 10-11 days before the election. Something completely unprecedented in modern US political elections. And instead of investigating how Russia is attempting to benefit from this reset...which was clearly political and strategic...we have one leaked debate question to Donna Brazile, Goldman and Citigroup conspiracy theories (and we could spend months discussing the Bush cabinet conflicts of interest and corruption involved with deciding which banks to save and which ones to let implode in 2008)...and that Bernie Sanders wasn't exactly helped by the Democrats. Okay. Not to mention Bernie Sanders has been an independent for most of his career...honeymooned in Communist Russia during the height of the Cold War...his two trademark positions during the campaign (breaking up big banks and free/universal college education) were 1) completely impractical, 2) not something he would directly control even as president and 3) both of these concepts had zero chance of getting through a GOP-led Congress. But putting roadblocks in the path of someone (Sanders) who has about the same amount of interest and knowledge about foreign policy as Donald Trump is clearly the equivalent of: 1) Giving Russia free reign with the Baltic States http://www.pri.org/stories/2017-01-05/balt...ssia-could-lead 2) Blowing up NATO and ceding more power with the European Union likely to splinter if Merkel loses re-election 3) Crimea and the Ukraine 4) Turkey and Syria 5) Partnership with Tillerson and Exxon/Mobil 6) Plotted to assassinate the Montengran PM in order to delay their entry into NATO and being another vote along with the Baltic States to block Russia http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/where-...636ac5a0435ac6a 7) Wikileaks/Assange/pro-Trump propaganda 8) Repression of free speech/press

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-derides-re...102.html?ref=gs Obama derides "reckless" plan to repeal...says he'll be on board if they can improve upon it, warns of consequences with a replacement at least two years away (after 2018 midterm elections). Ryan pledges to bring ObamaCare replacement legislation to Congress "this year" http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/paul-ryan-p...ory?id=44576835

Anja Taylor Joy became a rising star in The Witch, but nobody other than the critics really loved it. Fences was a pretty darned powerful little picture. Denzel and Viola Davis deserve all the accolades they're receiving. Lots of baseball references in there as well (takes place in 1957-1965ish Pittsburgh).

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-says-sande...-212438322.html A truly great president would not blame Bernie Sanders, his supporters or GOP obstructionism for his inability to convince America of ObamaCare's ultimate success.

One question, that...in the end, with her lack of debating skills, wouldn't matter. In fact, she's better when not overprepared and over-rehearsed. Which members that had nothing at all to do with economics or finance did Goldman or Citi influence? Trump exerted even more control over interview questions or terms of interviews than any candidate in history...because he was the main show in town and was driving ratings/advertising dollars. He still hasn't given a press conference. And Bernie Sanders had at least a 50/50 shot to knock off Clinton but there's no way he was ever going to win South Carolina. She loses there, especially with the African American vote, and her support crumbles. The GOP wanted practically any candidate but Trump to win...everyone could see how their internal firewalls worked out. Being the "outsider" or anti-establishment candidates helped Sanders and Trump immensely.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 08:24 PM) I disagree with Bregman. I think they believe he is very important to the roster. Having a good glove at 3B, especially with their staff, who has good offensive potential is important. As for Meadows, the Pirates have been shopping McCutchen because they can't afford him for the next contract. It appears that Meadows is the replacement. The Pirates need to have at least a shot at the playoffs each year to maintain the fan base. From all reports Meadows is the player who can replace him and they are reluctant to lose a player that close to the MLB, they need to replace an MLB player. all of this is JMHO but it doesn't take a genius to see where these negotiations are going. Maybe RH/KW will wear them down but it sure doesn't look like it. Then acquiring Gurriel, Beltran and McCann didn't make much sense if they want to continue to give at-bats to Gattis as well. The equation doesn't work if you're trying to play Bregman, not to mention AJ Reed. Something has to give. From all reports, Gurriel is an above-average defender at 3b, too.

We might as well throw Hawkins to the wolves while they're at it. Of course, that would put their scouting more under the microscope.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 05:14 AM) This is the strangest turn yet in this thread. That would probably have to involve Adam LaRoche wanting to provide a first-person account to SoxTalk about his mission trip saving women from human trafficking and the red-light districts of Thailand. Back to feathered serpiente talk.

Should have said UP to three years of control...now that he opted out of the original deal.

Try to make it over to Nha Trang, Hue and Da Nang in Vietnam unless you're going the clockwise direction into Thailand for return. Angkor Wat is one of the coolest wonders of the world (takes a FULL two days) but, for my money, Machu Picchu is still the best.

You would think that 2% who's going to actually be paying HIGHER taxes would be a bit upset that almost all of the benefits of the new tax policies are flowing upwards to the Top 1%, and, more specifically, the Top 10% of that 1%. These 2-3%ers are SUPPOSEDLY the JOB CREATORS/FAMILY FARMERS/SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS AS WELL, are they not? Or these are "merely" white collar professionals who mostly work FOR someone else? So they can safely be overlooked by Trump, because the majority of them aren't likely to vote Democrat regardless?

QUOTE (Tony @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 08:40 PM) If that was the case, he'd already be on another roster. Good thread though, this is a topic where legit arguments can be made on both sides. Maybe...but they need to have at least one "veteran" offensive player, and he's the natural choice with Moncada one of the most hyped prospects in MILB the last decade and obviously a fellow Cuban. That has more intrinsic value to the Sox organization (as well as their collective ability to "recruit" their countrymen) than the return available on the current trade market (due to the unsigned players). June/July, it will be revisited. At any rate, there has to be a few veteran players to hold down the fort and provide some stability...and unless you're a huge fan of someone like Davidson (or Delmonico/Coats), there's not really any at-bats theoretically being taken away from capable replacements in our current system. With Frazier/Robertson/Cabrera all likely on the way out...you need to have at least one identifiable player, and you can certainly make the argument is he currently has more value to the White Sox than to other teams, with the outside possibility the White Sox could be competitive in 2018 and definitely in 2019, his final contract year.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/higher-incom...-163613852.html The 2% of upper middle class Americans who are going to be paying higher taxes under Trump... https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-calls-for-...-143034008.html This is rich...Trump upset the GOP is being set up to take the "blame" on the health care issue. Well, no, it's called assuming the responsibility to fix it if you're the actual party in power. The GOP made zero effort eight years ago to do anything but obstruct a system that was actually far more conservative than Mitt Romney's program in Massachusetts. We're seriously considering a major cut in SS and Medicare benefits to those earning $12-14,000 per year but completely content to give Tillerson a $180 million golden parachute. Good luck on that.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 10:50 PM) Who knows what the future will hold, but at least Trump stood against the ethic's committee thing. Otoh, those were easy political points to score that didn't cost him anything. Remember, he's going to have to at least cooperate with the party beginning January 20th, and publicly slapping their wrists isn't going to sit well from an optics standpoint. Most members of Congress feel they can easily outlast the president, that he's just a temporary "anomaly" who will be around for at most 8 but likely only 4 years.

This Hawk/Benetti is at best 50/50...and might even favor Harrelson if we conducted a truly anonymous poll. It's definitely not some kind of "veto-proof" majority where 2/3rd's or 75% prefer Benetti. If that was the case, and they actually could defensibly argue the case that Harrelson was costing them money/ratings/ad buys, then he wouldn't be allowed to stay for another four years. Loyalty to the former broadcaster Hawk was...and not what he objectively IS today, would win out and JR would have a heart to heart with him about his chances of winning the Ford C. Frick broadcasting award actually decreasing the longer he holds on.

If Republicans were in charge of the executive branch: 1) No way does the FBI "flip flop" in the final 10-11 days happen so close to a presidential election, inconceivable 2) No way do they wait until AFTER the election in terms of the Russian hacking evidence (and "sanctions") https://www.yahoo.com/news/bernie-sanders-d...-215837024.html Here's an example of what we've devolved into. Sanders, rightly...points out that Trump long ago promised to defend all the government entitlement programs, and, not only that, accuses Huckabee of copying his idea. Reading the comments, instead of dealing with the issue of Trump's accountability...you simply get partisan attacks of Sanders. So why should the Democrats even bother to "objectively" tell the truth when it doesn't make the news/isn't memeworthy and doesn't end up with them retaining power? The Republicans would never have been so "soft" and "non-partisan" as Obama attempted to be with the FBI and Russian hacks issue. I honestly think nobody in the Democratic Party believed Trump could actually win until it was too late...but now there's nothing Obama can do as his entire legislative legacy is under attack. Obama has never been a fan of the Clintons and vice-versa. It's my belief he wanted to "censure" the Clintons while still believing she could not possibly "blow" the election.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 08:51 PM) If the Sox and Moncada are confident about him playing a good center field (and I mean GOOD) there's a real argument to be made for Albies. But that is a big if with Moncada and even so I think I'd still rather have Torres and Meadows than Albies. So if Torres or Meadows are on the table the Braves are already playing catch up to the Yanks or Pirates deals. Not that Atlanta can't catch up, they have a mountain of top 100 tier talent, I just don't think they would want to. The hill to make up trade value ground on a headliner is steep even if the distance between two guys seems short. Are the Braves really interested in moving Acuna AND Allard on top of Albies? Probably not. I don't think they should be, personally. But that's what it's gonna take to overcome a motivated buyer in Pittsburgh or New York. Why would you want to move Albies to CF when he's already better than Anderson at SS? It makes more sense than putting Moncada in CF and keeping Albies on the infield...but there are a lot of moving pieces. The biggest unknown is how well Anderson would do in center. You tend to either have those first step and route instincts (as well as playing shallow or being more comfortable coming in) or you don't. No amount of practice and repetition can make up for it. The easiest thing to do is finding a natural CFer, unless the scouts believe the upside of a Torres or Albies just can't be passed up and they're confident in a transition to a different (and key) defensive position.

With the Mets and Nationals blocking them, acquiring Q primarily for his last two years doesn't 100% make sense. It's almost the same argument as the White Sox holding onto Q in the first place. You can certainly make an argument that the White Sox SHOULD be competing for at least the wild card in 2019 and definitely the AL Central Division in 2020. Except the Sox desperately need those prospects as much as the Braves logically should hold onto them and let them arrive together as a wave at the major league level. Plus, Q alone won't draw out any fans in Atlanta, the new stadium/marketing will have to hold down the fort the next two years while they're fighting for respectability and then for the post-season when Harper leaves the Nationals and/or the Mets' rotation breaks down and/or Harvey is gone.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 08:09 PM) I would take a larger package around Meadows. I think I'd go with Torres based on his positional flexibility and athleticism. That said, we desperately need quality outfielders, so it's a hard choice. From my standpoint, Torres has the most helium and the bigger ceiling, but it's easy to get carried away with AFL results and regular season numbers are much more predictive.

I'm not sure when we should sacrifice anything in trade return unless we can get a true upgrade in CF. Seeing all these names like Mallex Smith, or Dalton Pompey (or similar), we could simply go out and "buy/trade for" Juan Lagares, Michael Taylor, Jarrod Dyson or a similar player as a placeholder. As the 4th/5th piece, I guess it's okay...but this is one of those situations where you hope to get two potential All-Stars out of a deal. And then you have to consider that cost/trade or flip value of those acquisitions versus giving playing time to Tilson or possibly Engel/May out there. But it's going to be incredibly important to have a strong defensive CFer to give all our young pitchers as much confidence as possible beginning in late May or early June. So back to Albies/Maitan/Newcomb....you need at least two of those three. The back end isn't as important as long as you get the first two guys you're targeting. Captain Obviously Fantastic. At the moment, with Meadows, he's the centerpiece...but you can't get him until the Pirates have decided they won't get fair value on McCutcheon, and even then they need to keep him as "insurance" for an injury to Marte/Polanco/McCutcheon unless they feel pretty darned confident they can get by putting Bell out in LF or RF and covering his anticipated defensive inadequacies with Marte/Polanco. For now, the Pirates aren't budging and the Astros believe they're still ahead of Texas and the Mariners. Until those two situations change, then any movement would have to come from the Braves raising their package or the Yankees deciding they are legitimately competing in 2017 instead of "retooling" and hoping for the best.

Here's the thing. I occasionally learn something new about the game from Hawk, and I probably appreciate his historical references more than most...certainly those 40 and over are probably more in this "camp" as opposed to the modern school of thinking on announcers. Living abroad for most of the past decade, I've listened to tons of broadcasts from major and minor league teams. Farmer and DJ, for example, are just as homerish as Harrelson, Farmer in particularly. DJ is always a bit more detached and critical. I've watched a former college dorm-mate (Brett Dolan) go on to get a top t.v. job with the Astros (then lose it, mostly through no fault of his own) and the thing is that Brett or Benetti or any of those guys, they're solid and professional and do their homework and know their stuff, but they just don't have the same amount of passion about the sport or their team because they're used to covering sports year-round in order to make a living (the first 10-15 years of most broadcasting careers). Maybe they're guys you hang out with and say..."Well, if only I'd chosen that path, was in the right place at the right time..." With Harrelson's knowledge and experience, there's honestly no way you can train or replicate it. That's why I've enjoyed him so much since the 1980's. As far the modern school of announcing, they're generalists, to a large extent. Maybe for young people, that's preferable...but not to my taste. As Thad Bosley noted, we're not going to come to a consensus about this, any more than if we were talking about artwork, music or movies. Everyone has their criteria in terms of what they want to get out of sitting down and watching a baseball game.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 01:15 PM) That statistic is probably skewed because I presume the 1% impact as a percentage of their income could be significantly different. As a percent savings, it might be pretty significant. I still fully believe that the people who are the most tax screwed are most likely the upper middle class people or for the sake of this exercise, because the data is available, the 80-99%th percentile (134K - 615K by tax bracket), they also pay approximately 38% of total taxes). The 1% pays about 46^ of the taxes, but that is largley skewed by the fact that you are taking about huge mega dollars getting applied to a capital gains rate, so the effective rates at that level are much lower then the effective rates of the 80-99% percentile of income). More specifically, it is those who are in that percentile who are not self-employed who take even more of the brunt as their are just so few tax advantages. I'm just not sure how that group and Trump's typical voters in Wisconsin, MI, PA and Ohio have interests that are aligned. This latter group will be decimated by Ryan/Grover Norquist and Tom Price...and not so much by Trump's numerous conflicts of interest.

Two bonus picks... Independence Day remake After Earth Alice Through the Looking Glass Piranha 3DD The 3rd Human Centipede movie Fifty Shades of Grey Away with the Bullets for foreign films (China) Biggest guilty pleasure: Pacific Rim