lostfan

Man, the religious right got all spun up about Obama hating God and everything because he chose to observe the National Day of Prayer in private... first of all, the "tradition" of making it a major event every year started with Bush, and secondly, this is right out of the Bible: Matthew 6:5 "And whenever you pray, don't be like the hypocrites who love to stand in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they will be seen by people. I tell you with certainty, they have their full reward! Matthew 6:6 But whenever you pray, go into your room, close the door, and pray to your Father who is hidden. And your Father who sees from the hidden place will reward you. I'm no religious scholar but that sounds pretty simple to me - directly contradicts all of these people who make a big issue out of praying in public. If you want to do it, then do it, nobody's stopping you. Just don't expect everybody to follow you with some kind of fanatical devotion, and don't get offended when some people just don't want to be bothered.

QUOTE (Wanne @ May 9, 2009 -> 12:35 AM) Biggest thing that sticks out in my mind with this current lineup...FIELDS DOESN'T BELONG IN THE 2 HOLE!!! Goddamn....too much pressure on him. I generally don't buy the "pressure" argument, but it's safe to say that in no way does Fields even vaguely profile a 2 hitter, and it's messing up his approach.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 9, 2009 -> 09:49 AM) The first sentance is for you. The rest is collective, not necessarily you. However, you did make the comment that I commented about. Fair enough, I'm sure you recognize that I don't get into those kinds of arguments most of the time.

I don't understand the point of this - look at our lineup, who's underachieving? Alexei, Fields, Quentin (average has plummeted lately). Those guys, now along with Getz, are the core of our "youth movement." Thome, Konerko, Dye, and AJ are part of the "old" core. The only one out of those who is underachieving right now is Thome. How does dumping everyone help?

I'm a Poreda fan, but I think he would get lit up like a pinball machine if he started right now.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 8, 2009 -> 08:29 PM) Oh come on. Use your brain and take the lib goggles off for a minute. - you are way smarter then this post. They are using sarcasm as a means to show Obama "being one of the common folks" by mocking his mustard selection. OF COURSE no one gives a s***, including them, they are only making a sarcastic tone about it. But since it's a "conservative" (quotes for bmags) of course they are asshats and dickheads and b****es who are drop dead SERIOUSSSSSSSSSS about this. Please. You all want so bad to villify the other side when people hide behind their "comedy" by mocking the same exact s*** by "conservatives". And, Hannity, Ingrahm, Limbaugh, are NOT news sources, you all are REALLY quick to remind us all of that. Yawn... where do you draw all these ridiculous conclusions about me from? Find me an example where I've done something like whatever you're talking about (I'm not even sure I know to be honest), ever.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 8, 2009 -> 12:42 PM) Yes, but White Sox hitters get hit a lot more than the opposition, and I don't think the majority are intentional, but............................. Its time to put something in the pitcher's mind. If they are going to come inside and hit a White Sox, one of their guys is going to pay the price. It can only help the White Sox offense if an opposing pitcher is even slightly less motivated to pitch inside. I agree, I'm just saying Quentin is a poor example.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 8, 2009 -> 04:45 PM) FYI - they do the same damn things that Hannity, Limbaugh, and Ingrahm do - it's called sarcasm... but of course in your mind that makes the Comedy Central stuff ok. I see, it's different somehow. See, they get to hide behind that "comedy" thing when in reality it is exactly the same thing. I don't buy that - who are they mocking with sarcasm? Themselves? Who else says things like that?

Seriously - Photoshop.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 8, 2009 -> 03:30 PM) IIRC wasn't Obama pretty quiet on most of these issues in the campaign? I mean he spoke the company line and all, but I seem to remember him getting criticism for this not being a bigger issue for him, with him being a minority himself. It was something he said he was going to do, but it wasn't like a big campaign promise or anything.

Well, I know that all it takes is a stroke of his pen, but it's actually a really big deal in practice and it's going to cause a lot of noise when he does it. It's going to start a national dialogue/argument (read: expend political capital) which he can't afford when his #1 priority is still the economy and his #2 priority is Afpak. I suppose I'll concede that giving it extra attention isn't hurting anything, but I'm sure he still has every intention of allowing gays to serve (saying "repeal DADT" is a misnomer, since it's not like Clinton actually banned gays from serving, if it was repealed then we'd go back to having people being court-martialed) until he tells us otherwise.

Not what I said.

QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ May 8, 2009 -> 01:52 PM) I watched the Rachel Maddow segment on this yesterday and I still can't believe this. I see no excuse why Obama hasn't changed this if it is within his powers. It's shameful, and embarassing. Why doesn't the constitution stop this? As far as the Constitution, the president is commander-in-chief of the military, he can do what he wants. He's going to change it... I mean I could see if we were 2 years into his presidency and there was no movement onto this, but he's only been in office 3 months.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 8, 2009 -> 12:42 PM) I do hope they get rid of DADT. The military needs to join the laws of the rest of the country, as they've been for some time now, in not criminalizing or penalizing sexual preference and acts (not talking about marriage here). The military had to be forced into racial integration, it had problems along the way, but it happened and worked. Same with women in the military, although that is still happening. This one should be no different. You know what I found kind of odd - in the military you can crack gay jokes at will with no repercussions whatsoever, but you can't make any racist/sexist/religious etc. jokes or you get in big trouble. Then I took a corporate-type job, but in the exact same environment - cracking a gay joke at the wrong time can get you fired, just like the rest of America.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 8, 2009 -> 12:35 PM) The problem of course is that the President has the authority to end that problem any day he wants to with a simple executive order...he doesn't need to push it through Congress IIRC. So basically, the Arab linguist just dismissed yesterday was out because the President doesn't want to expend political capital on this issue yet. That's fair to say but this is really kind of making a mountain out of a molehill. I think it's pretty obvious he's had other priorities. The other XO's he gave were pretty low-impact and symbolic, with the exception of Guantanamo which wasn't even an immediate change, more like an announcement of intentions.

QUOTE (Brian @ May 8, 2009 -> 12:15 PM) I love watching Lebron go to hole hard, but he will never be the shooter Jordan was. Well, in fairness, he's a forward.

QUOTE (Brian @ May 8, 2009 -> 12:13 PM) Agree with KW, especially when it seems Q is taking the bean balls all the time. He gets hit all the time because he crowds the plate, not because pitchers throw at him. Some players would back off, he chooses not to.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 8, 2009 -> 12:23 PM) Even as an advocate of an FDIC like rapid takeover and reshuffling of BofA, Citi, and the other biggest few, I'll be the first to admit it's not as easy as you make it sound when you go from the smaller banks the FDIC is eating every friday night (My money says tonight will be 3 more) to the large, multi-national businesses that aren't just banks but are also owning other businesses, investment firms, etc. Unraveling these smaller banks takes the FDIC days. Unraveling Citigroup would be an abject nightmare. I think its a better nightmare than having the banks string along for the next 5 years as one bubble (option ARM, Commercial real estate, credit cards) pops after another, and I think simply breaking their stranglehold on Congress alone would be worth the trouble, but don't insinuate it would be simple or even similar to what the FDIC is already doing. Actually how to do that, and whether the government has the authority/ability to actually do that, is a whole other discussion. What I was getting at is the inconsistency and the constant dumbing-down of complicated ideas like this. If you don't like an idea just call it "socialized" or "nationalized" so that liberals instinctively run away from it because of the gratuitous "socialism" label. Whether the labels are actually accurate is irrelevant.

I find this piece here incredibly annoying, it's like they're desperate for something to talk about. http://amfix.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/08/dont...es-under-obama/ Yeah... an officer admitted being gay and got discharged from the Army... well no s***, it hasn't been repealed yet, whenever it happens it will be a pretty substantial change. Holy s***, we must really have ADD in this country really bad. Obama has over 3 1/2 years left in this term to repeal DADT. They're already coming after him as if he flip-flopped.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 8, 2009 -> 11:35 AM) haha, I wonder if he actually did say that and the reporter's just making him seem like an idiot. They do that to Sarah Palin routinely. lol.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 8, 2009 -> 12:03 PM) When the Socialists seized power in that awful coup last november. Right on cue, this is exactly where I was going with this. Now instead of that option, which may have actually been the best one, we have this current sloppy abomination of endless bailouts because that first option was taken off the table before it was ever really put on (nevermind that this is actually what the FDIC does and there is nothing "socialist" about it). Law of unintended consequences - see what happens when sloppy labels are thrown around?

At what point did temporary government takeover to clear off bad assets, recapitalize, etc. and return a bank to the private sector become "nationalization" (a dirty word)?

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ May 8, 2009 -> 10:05 AM) You do realize that Michael won the scoring title, MVP, and defensive player of the year when he was 24, right? Haha. Beat me to it. You would think MJ was chopped liver early in his career or something. He came into the league with instant impact and he was thoroughly dominating in his 3rd year - probably would've happened in his 2nd year if he didn't break his foot and miss most of the year.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 7, 2009 -> 09:33 PM) Longest outing for one of our starting pitchers here? Didn't Danks go 8 not too long ago?

Bah. That would've been awesome.