lostfan

Why does she keep spitting in my mouth?

lol I didn't pick up the sarcasm. Fail. Point and laugh, everyone. I've seen too many people *not* being sarcastic that it's hard to tell anymore.

A holdout is a player's only leverage a lot of times. When a guy underperforms or the team doesn't want him anymore they can just cut him and not have to pay anything but the bonus/guaranteed money. When he overperforms the team is just getting a free ride and without the ability to hold out the player has nothing, he's basically just the property of the team. Some players really overdo it though, remember when Vasher said he was going to hold out a few years ago, after a year or whatever and it lasted like one day and they basically told him to STFU? Then what did happen when he got an extension... he started to suck and eventually got cut.

I just didn't really feel like I should have to explain why certain things I believe mean that I don't love terrorists.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 8, 2010 -> 07:29 PM) So what? That's not the point. Even if it was your point and it is wrong. lol I am infallible. True story.

It wasn't really worth addressing with a serious response.

Name 5 Republicans in Congress who have voted for tax increases or even said they intended to do it in the past 10 years. I'll give you John McCain (who has since completely and totally flip-flopped). Go.

Obama isn't or hasn't ever been against tax cuts across the board, the people who say that don't really listen to everything he says. Like any Democrat he's in favor of certain tax cuts, against some others, wants to leave some of it alone, wants to let most of the Bush tax cuts expire b/c of the deficit, and/or wants to raise taxes on certain people (higher taxes in higher brackets which isn't as much of a Commie idea as the supply-side crowd tries to make it sound). Whereas a Republican always, always, always, always, ALWAYS wants to cut taxes with just a handful of isolated examples that don't.

^^ That particular point is kind of a pet peeve for me.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 8, 2010 -> 01:27 PM) Or when the left wing will start talking about freedoms again... It had been said by a few people I talked to that nobody on the right (well, the smart people anyway, not so much the mouth-breathers) actually disputed that they had a right to build the community center (I'm not going to call it a mosque)... same thing applies. I haven't seen anybody anywhere disputing that this dude has the right to burn Korans. And yes the Muslims in other countries are being blatantly hypocritical when they are okay with people burning American flags and I'll go out on a limb and say Bibles, too, but that is beside the point, and again we are acting like Newt Gingrich and lowering our standards of behavior to theirs so that we can make a point. Me, I just fail to see how this is productive at all. Yeah I know they had a list of 10 things but what is this supposed to accomplish? Being inflammatory just for the sake of doing it? To show people that we hate Muslims and don't want them here? Well okay, then. People should just come out and say that then, at least be honest.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Sep 8, 2010 -> 01:32 PM) The left wing only wants freedoms for the Muslim Terrorists. Asinine.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 07:42 PM) I have to hand it to you, tough to buy a stock that highly priced, but I'm sure the people who bought Google at $233 are pretty happy right now. So good luck to you. I can't imagine you would get hurt by doing it. bumping this thread because I liked it. I ended up selling this stock for $268. I got tired of it going up and down, it'd go up into the high 260s (peaking at 273 once, its all-time high) every time Apple released a new product or had some news but then it'd go right back down to 240 or so. Since they don't pay a dividend there's no point in me sitting around waiting for it to appreciate, especially when there have already been 2 points where I could've sold the 5 shares for the same gain. Still, I made 15% or so on that in 6 months (gotta check my math but I think I'm close)... much more than it would've been if I had it sitting in a savings account or even the mutual fund it was in. I just decided to buy a bunch of Verizon shares instead... I had no idea that they paid such a huge dividend. I blame Y2HH for not telling me this, frankly. Now at least the 2 companies I have are actually doing something, BP used to pay a really good dividend but that was before it literally went up in flames and had to suspend dividends to pay for all the damage. It'd be silly to b**** about this (but of course a lot are).

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 8, 2010 -> 12:27 AM) Get ready, because that's getting ready to happen everywhere. Welcome to ObamaCare ™. I'm not trying to be an asshole like in the filibuster, but seriously, it's going to get UGLY on insurance costs. This is all a part to move everyone over to the gov't pool... unions shield some of it (sunset provisions in the law) but in general, private insurance is going to be gone in 5 years because no one will be able to afford it and they'll just say "f*** it" and opt for the government pool. Even still, they're covering that amount with more salary (my job's not doing anything like this but they are rolling in cash with no debt except to the equity company that bought them out, so it's a moot point)

So he called me again and he doesn't really have a question, he's just completely confused as to why anyone even bothered, no matter how you look at it it sounds kind of pointless. "Were giving you a raise but we are taking that amount out of your benefits" "we are increasing the amount you contribute to your benefits but we'll pay for it"

So my dad called to ask me something and I don't really know. He said that at his job they are getting a raise, but at the same time they're increasing the percentage that the employee contributes for their healthcare premium so that in effect they are actually getting nothing, and he's wondering if it's even legal or above-board to do that. I guess supposedly the union compromised on their last negotiations and took less salary because it was going to go into employee benefits and somehow the president manipulated a way out of having to pay out any more money behind closed doors (he wasn't on the phone long enough to explain this all the way). I'm guessing it's probably not the most ethical way of doing things but it's probably all legal unless the president blatantly breached the contract somehow...?

QUOTE (11and1 @ Sep 7, 2010 -> 02:59 AM) Any discussion of Ozzie's relative strengths and weaknesses has to take into account how bizarre this year has been. You can't pin the blame for the entire first half on Ozzie, just as you cannot give him all the credit for the entire second half. This team has been beyond streaky. Has Ozzie made bad on-field decisions this season? Absolutely.what manager hasn't? Has Ozzie made the right decisions this year, only to have usually reliabe players fail horribly? Absolutely, show me a team that hasn't happened to. The result is love/hate for Ozzie that has whipsawed as violently as the team's performance. As tired as I am of his truly idiotic rants, his feud with KW, his kids and all the other drama, he is the face of the franchise, and like it or not he keeps this team relevant in a town where the odds are always against that. How many other managers are nationally recognized by their first name alone? Ozzie sells tickets and draws national media attention--remembering that if you're the White Sox there is no such thing as bad publicity. He has certainly cost us some games--how many is for people smarter than me to figure out--but he also has his team back in a race that most of us considered a totally lost cause as recently as the ASB. I am not defending his inexplicable fondness for Kotsay or his part in management's inexplicable but collective decision to let Thome go. I'm just saying this team is still alive and actually showing more late-game resilience than we've seen in years. You can certainly blame Ozzie for the Sox trailing the Twins by 3.5 games, but then you gotta give him some of the credit for not trailing by 13.5, without Peavy and with an erratic Jenks. Oh, and speaking of managers we love to hate, "Gardy" is at the top of my list. He comes across as smug, arrogant and is hailed as a genius when in fact any of us could win with that lineup--even without Morneau and Nathan. And he plays dirty against us. I'd much rather beat on him than Ozzie. Now, could we please just get on with it and win another World Series? Bravo. A post that is not loaded with "you idiots all want Ozzie to be taken out back and shot" strawmen is refreshing.

Ugh I tried to read this thread but I guess I'm done with it, too many cringe-worthy posts in rapid succession from know-it-alls, and more asinine Thome talk. This is like the Brian Anderson debates all over again.

Where is "Republicans"

I don't remember anybody other being mayor. I mean I know of them (Byrne, obviously Harold Washington) but I don't actually remember it. I saw some people on Facebook saying Ditka for mayor. God Bears fans are f***ing stupid.

QUOTE (elgonzo4sox @ Sep 6, 2010 -> 05:19 PM) You guys wanted to keep Kotsay (but play him less) and add Thome? It's a 25 man roster, not 26. Who do you throw off the 25 man lifeboat? We started the season with 12 pitchers and 8 starters in the field, leaving 5 backup fielders plus the DH. Castro backs up AJ, so that's one backup. Which of Vizquel, Nix or Jones would you have dropped to add Thome and keep Kotsay? If you drop Nix you have only 1 backup 3B-SS-2B. If you drop Jones you have only 1 real backup OF. When he was brought back I had no idea what the final roster was going to look like. Obviously had I known this was a straight-up choice between Kotsay and Thome I would've said Thome. I really didn't think we were actually going to go into the season with that roster and that Ozzie really intended to give Kotsay 300-400 at bats.

Damn, it's been 7 in a row already? I guess that's what happens when you keep sweeping series. Now if the Twins would just lose... ugh

QUOTE (hi8is @ Sep 6, 2010 -> 04:30 PM) Don't we pretty much always mash against zoolander? Not lately... 1.40 ERA vs. us in 2009

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Sep 6, 2010 -> 01:11 PM) Just a quick reminder to everyone who s***s on unions and the organized labor movement. If it wasn't for them, you'd be at work today. So basically what you're saying is that unions are only interested in not working and being paid for it.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 6, 2010 -> 02:50 AM) Great post caufield. I respect your posts. My major beef is this is not an issue anywhere besides this message board. Regular fans think Ozzie is fine. We are 16 f***ing games over .500 and just swept Boston on the road and some people are wanting him fired NOW. It is totally insane and is a MESSAGE BOARD PHENOMENON. It just is. It's ridiculous. He is a good manager. As proof of this I'll ask "Where is Rongey?" Me thinks he realizes we all are insane, f***ing insane and has left. Greg you're speaking for hypothetical Sox fans you don't know. You think Soxtalk is rough? I think you'd be surprised to find what "regular Sox fans" think (I don't know why Soxtalk doesn't xount anyway) if you just started talking to random fans. They don't all think the same thing, and this love affair with Ozzie is kind of imaginary. Some love him some are sick of him and some don't care that much. Just like here.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 6, 2010 -> 12:42 PM) Kotsay would be the 1b backup that would play every 10 games or so and be the left handed PH bat off the bench. That's all he's good for at this stage in his career but we decided to make him a 5 games/week type player and of course he failed. This is what I thought he'd be doing when he was brought back and I had no problem with it at all.