Flash Tizzle

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 08:35 PM) Simon asking Crystal, so do you go tanning? Crystal of course is a fine orange color, and she patterns herself after Paris Hilton. Sadly though, her mom who is about 50 is doing the same thing. She wasn't too bright. That was obvious before her audition, when asked about her inspiration. It followed these lines, "Yeah...............uh..........I like music.....and....I don't know. I listen to it everyday!"

How about Crystal's mother? Broad was wearing clothing for someone half her age. Her tits were sagging halfway down her belly. I love these auditions. Hate the show beyond this point.

Yeah, that "guy" Eric was an odd fellow. It was funny how Paula asked "what's different about you," and Simon laughed. Anyone watching the show knows what I'm talking about.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 07:11 PM) I just heard an audio clip on YTMND of him backtracking saying something along the lines of "How do you make chocolate? With dark chocolate and white milk. That was the chocolate treat I was referring to." :rolly Yeah, I heard that. It's funny. But now what about the other minority groups? Will he add new flavors to his cultural blend of delicious chocolate to make sure others aren't excluded? "See, what I REALLY meant by "chocolate" is it's the addition of 60% dark, beautiful, sweet, sweet chocolate, 20% spoiled white milk, roughly 10% hispanic flavored spices, and a remaining collection of inferior ethnicities."

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 07:09 PM) oh my god that is so racist. What can I say? I love my ice cream white and my major cities whiter.

I'm glad he's being taken to task for this. I almost expected our liberal posters to say something such as "HE'S BEEN THROUGH ALOT OF STRESS!" or "HE'S MERELY TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE CULTURAL FLAVOR OF NEW ORLEANS!" Somewhere Jesse Jackson is secretly phoning Nagin and telling him there's nothing wrong with what he said.

I remember something similar on one of those wild TLC or Discovery programs which highlight humany misery. May have been Spike TV, I don't recall. But anyways, it was caught on film. A mechanic of a fighter jet was caught on night vision walking past a turbine engine, where he was literally sucked into it. He miraculously survived. It looked surreal on tape; something you'd never expect to witness. Too bad this guy wasn't so lucky.

"OMG, THE CONTROVERSY!!!!!!!!!"

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 16, 2006 -> 12:06 PM) How dare you say that about the legend. The way some people talk about McCarthy reminds me of how people talked about Reed, if not worse. Considering Reed never saw a major league pitch while a White Sox it's not exactly the same comparison. It would be if he struggled, was sent down to AAA, corrected his swing, came back, and became one the team's (and leagues) best hitters down the final stretch.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 16, 2006 -> 12:03 PM) who care what it would have cost? I would rather have prior than BMAC any day of the week. This is all speculation from us--since we have no idea what the Orioles would seek. But if you believe it would cost JUST McCarthy, well, then obviously you didn't notice the outrageous demands Orioles presented for Tejada. It wouldn't be just McCarthy. McCarthy and Cotts may not have been enough. What sense would it make for a pitching depleted team to deal Prior for just McCarthy? Are you willing to forsake BMac and Cotts for three years of Prior? As I said earlier in the thread, I believe Prior is playing for free-agency; aka, big bucks. If the White Sox were positive they could obtain him beyond his Cubs' contract, and Contreras would bring us a decent package, then I'd approve it. Sort of ridiculous to argue on three possible scenario's which stem from one point that never occured. Personally, Cotts/McCarthy or Prior would have been fine. I'm just attempting to guess a reasonable cost.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 16, 2006 -> 11:02 AM) Probably would've been Count, Sweeney, and Woodson. Orioles would laugh. Think about it--Orioles could have one of the premier pitchers in the game for three years in Prior; or a craptacular package of a late 30's Cuban with one year remaining on his contract, and two prospects far from can't miss. It would have been McCarthy and Cotts, if I had to guess. Only makes sense for Baltimore.

I guarantee such an acquisition would cost McCarthy and Cotts. Baltimore wouldn't have any intentions of trading Prior, since they obviously need pitching, unless we were willing to provide a good package. I wouldn't want Prior for the price Baltimore would likely seek. Although that would also be dependent upon the value Contreras would bring in a trade. Certaintly no one on McCarthy or Cotts level, but we'd need a quality BP arm/top pitching prospect. You figure Prior wouldn't be pitching on the southside very long, anyways. Once he's a free agent, and commanding 13 million+ year, he's moving onto other markets. McCarthy alone is worth more to this team longterm than Prior.

QUOTE(KevHead0881 @ Jan 14, 2006 -> 07:09 PM) By the way, what the f*** is Bobby Howry's problem? New Cub Howry still taking shots at Sox Who pissed in his cereal? This ain't the first time he's said s*** like this. I don't know where Howry gets off talking about career years with our players where he had one himself. I'm sure this will be spinned as Howry "livening up the inner city rivalry." Meanwhile, if roles were reversed and any of our players said this it would be labeled "jealousy." Odd--I thought Cub players and fan didn't concern themselves with the White Sox? Even though our team has been continually mentioned by fans during Q&A sessions, as well as interviews with players.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Jan 14, 2006 -> 07:00 PM) KW proved you wrong. Doubt all you want though. You can't count on that.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 14, 2006 -> 04:51 PM) I love how we can draw these conclusions without any of you having listened to him calling a game. I haven't eaten s*** either--but I guarantee it doesn't taste good. I can't believe Singleton's demeanor, which has continually been regarded as quiet and reserved, will suddenly transform once he enters the booth. His "you knows" sure sounds like someone who's quite nervous. How can I be expected to be optimistic? Since I don't listen to games on the radio often it doesn't bother me. But as I've said before, I honestly can't believe there were NO better alternatives. Just as our minor league prospects are busts (in my mind) until proven otherwise, I'll assume little of Singleton until he proves himself.

QUOTE(3 BeWareTheNewSox 5 @ Jan 14, 2006 -> 04:38 PM) The kid died Here comes the lawsuits and claims of excessive force.

QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Jan 14, 2006 -> 11:19 AM) Rongy is interviewing Singleton right now, and if he says "you know" one more f***ing time, my head is going to explode. Good God. Lighten up Frances, he's not pitching the 8th inning or anything. GIVE HIM A CHANCE!!!!!!!!!11

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Jan 14, 2006 -> 03:35 AM) http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews...ts/13622218.htm Why did we ever sign that guy last year? Well, Sweeney just guaranteed himself a trip to Congress if Steroid hearings ever resume. I believe signing Giambi was sort of a favor for Arn Tellem, his agent.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jan 13, 2006 -> 05:10 PM) I feel you and I think you should see the film for yourself. It's not the 'pro gay film' porn fest everyone wants to believe it is. I'd go so far as to say it's not even a 'gay film'. In a nutshell, no it probably doesn't do any of the things you're looking for, but it doesn't set out to. Does that make it a bad film? IMO, no. Like I said, comparing films head to head is impossible. But what exactly makes it a contender for Best Picture if it doesn't actually address the subject of homosexuality? It would be similar to Clint Eastwood not presenting the conflicting views of mercy killings within Million Dollar Baby. I don't understand how a film about two gay cowboys can't include any of the troubles one may experience, and yet is considered "revolutionary." I've already heard three news segments use a variation of the term when highlighting the film.

QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 13, 2006 -> 04:15 PM) We can sign Jeff Weaver! We negotiate with Boras for Weaver?

QUOTE(Steff @ Jan 13, 2006 -> 04:11 PM) Someone not related woke him up...?? Alright, I somehow skipped over that excerpt.

QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 13, 2006 -> 04:10 PM) Whatever...Abreau would be an incredible addition to the Sox! If we can get him, I say, GO 4 it! ....And our bullpen? We'd be without two legitimate arms if Contreras is traded and McCarthy moves into the rotation. You can't have two in house or non-roster invitees battle for the open positions.

I don't understand how a child can accidentally choke himself without thrasing and waking up his dad. Especially in a two door car. If anything, the father probably left the car (for whatever reason) while his son suffocated. The "sleeping in front seat" allibi sounds false.

Easy way to settle this. R&W: As of right now, do you support trading Manny? If you do, what return would satisfy you expectations of a good deal in Boston's favor?

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jan 13, 2006 -> 10:14 AM) This is a personal bias, but I have a hard time giving too much praise to films that are based on actual events. If you have a great, true story to begin with, it's pretty hard to make a bad film out of it. Hotel Rwanada is a recent example that comes to mind. Great story, but nothing about the film making itself really blew me away. On the other hand, it is much tougher to first come up with a good story for a film and then follow it up with a good production. It's difficult to compare films like Munich and BBM head to head since they set out to do different things. I agree it's not that simple. However, you can't just recreate true stories without additional elements. Look at Titanic: everyone knew it was bound to sink before they entered the theater, but due to the numerous conflicts within the film (ie, DiCaprio/Winslet, DiCaprio/Zane) it provided an ideal blend of drama which obviously persuaded academy voters. If anything, events based off reality only restrict directors, screenwritiers, etc. I haven't seen BBM, and I don't believe I will. Which is why I emphasize it must be one hell of a movie to defeat Munich. Ask yourself, if you've seen the movie, how Eric Bana has evaded talks of winning an Oscar? I couldn't care how gay Gyllenhal or Ledger can portray themselves, Bana should atleast be included in discussions for Best Actor. It's amazing how shunned Munich has seemingly become. What I wonder about the film is how exactly the relationship between Ledger and Gyllenhal is portrayed. Are they outcast by society? Does the movie illustrate how difficult it is to have an open relationship with another person of the same sex? What message does Ang Lee send about homosexual relationships? For all the discussions pertaining to the film being "revolutionary" I'd expect several of the preceding points to be addressed. If not--or not to the extent a best picture warrants, then I'll be convinced this movie is being acclaimed simply because the two leading actors are THE GAY!11@@@ If I created a story about a chicken f***ing lunatic who must choose between his love of assraping chickens, or conforming to socities standards towards such activities, I damn well better include as many angles as possible within the script. I"m not comparing homosexuality to chicken f***ing; but rather the depth of inner conflicts and society pressure I'd have to show. Bottom line--does BBM do this? What Munich did successfully is not only highlight the inner struggles Aver (Bana) experiences, but openly suggests the acts of Israel may have actually caused more harm than good. If lends the audience (I imagine) to pick sides. Do they support Israel's act of retaliation, or sympathize with terrorists? What message does BBM send? I haven't extensively asked people about the movie, but no one I've talked to really has been overwhelmed by it. It seems liberal individuals are more intent on promoting the movie as a venue to expose people to homosexuality than the film itself.