Con te Giolito

Would you be offended if I implied that you were a member of the KKK?

You dont know or understand the difference between multiculturalism and assimilation. I'm sorry, you can do all the weaseling and "WHY WONT YOU RESPOND TO MY POINTS" but that kind of wanton disregard to even familiarize yourself to a college freshman level understanding of the issue disqualifies you from having a thought worth taking seriously on the matter. You say the USA and Europe are different, but aside from the Atlantic Ocean separating them you seem unable to explain why. And you are hung up on this idea that I'm afraid of terror attacks and that its "risky" to let them in lest we invite more attacks onto our shores. That's not really the point and never has been. Terror attacks are just symptoms of larger issue Muslim refugees have assimilating into the native culture, but because you dont really understand what assimilation is (the fact that you think it means they have to respect our laws actually made me LOL) having this discussion with you is worthless. It'd be like asking my dog how to fix something on my car. I'm not falling for it, and my refusal to insult my own intelligence and do battle with somebody who is literally clueless on the topic is not "running away from the argument".

You earlier: My guess is you have absolutely zero understanding of why refugees have issues in Europe, or why Europe is having issues with refugees. Interesting you worded it the way you did, do you think its the responsibility of receiving countries to change for refugees or the other way around? Because you seem to be agreeing with anyone who vouches for assimilation, and your criticism of Europe here tends to side with that, but initially you definitely took a stand with multiculturalism. I suspect you are talking entirely out of your ass and have very little idea what it is you are even talking about. Also, I'm done talking about immigration. I actually have very few problems with American immigration policy, the only real one being it seems content with leaving about 15 million people in this country basically stateless because partisan bickering has prevented opening up a path to citizenship for them. This strategy of bringing up straight out of the textbook history (and calling me a klansman, which is a pretty serious accusation to levy so glibly) is not one I'm going to abide anymore because (a) it's f***ing BORING and (b) it doesn't even apply. The words refugee and immigrant have different meanings and this ignorant fusion of the two is obfuscating the real discussion over this particular executive order and the broader debate hanging over it. People who think they informed on the issue just because they can recite history taught to every single high school student in this country and then calling me a KKK member because I have the nerve to say it may be a bit more nuanced is not pleasant.

And...? Are you really just programmed to react to anything that even slightly challenges your worldview with "beep boop white male beep bopp"? And if you dont like white males why in god's name are you in Seattle, WA? It really does not get any white male-ier than Seattle.

Obviously the second point.

Rings matter a lot.

Right, especially with a new administration that is working off an electoral mandate to stop and reassess our vetting process. Anyone who thought Trump would be a 3rd term for Obama and is absolutely incensed and outraged that it isn't, like all those people at Terminal 5 (fyi I have been to Terminal 5 like 10 times since Sunday and haven't seen anything more than the barricades...so who knows), I gotta ask what you were expecting?

Again, this is propaganda. Saying I have "zero idea of history" then coming at me with high school curriculum cliches is kind of insulting. Not all of this is even true, and even the parts that are are often dramatized to the point of fantasy to become the myth and lore that fills the foundation of American Exceptionalism. Immigration is told to n a starry eyed tone as America's great stake to moral relevance. To that point I kind of agree? I dont know, its a bit tough when you start getting into why the USA has behaved the way it has at certain points in history. Why do you think the USA was so cozy with Hitler in the 1930's? Could it have had something to do with the absolutely massive German population wielding its affection for the motherland as political club to force the US into isolationist policy? Its time we start separating immigrants from refugees. Immigrants go through a lengthy, intentionally arduous process and for many countries have to satisfy a points system that basically requires they be at minimum educated or skilled in an in-demand field. As an immigrant the USA is amongst the easiest Western countries to get into, easier than the golden multiculti city on the hill Canada or population hemorrhaging European states. Refugees on the other hand, well you dont really know what you're getting. And you're saying assimilation has never been forced? Do you know what used to fill the area that is now UIC? Or how the military was called into to Quincy IL to deliver a "convert, leave or die" ultimatum to the Mormons? I can pull up hundreds of examples in just this great state of Illinois of assimilation being forced. And even if we accept the romantic retelling of American immigration history, just because a dynamic has existed in the past does not mean it will continue in the future. Things have changed from many angles in the world of immigration. The needs receiving countries, the policies of receiving countries, the nature of what a refugee actually is...I cannot stress enough how different the world is now than it was then. Ellis Island is a museum now. This may or may not be happening with Muslims. Its interesting to note that many of the attackers in the USA and Europe claimed by ISIS are actually native westerners. The sons of immigrants and refugees are the ones committing the attacks, not the refugees and immigrants themselves. Also intermarriage rates and other signs of assimilation dont seem to improve much generation to generation with Muslims. This is different than other recent immigrant groups, particularly hispanics. My position is wait about five-ish years to accept more refugees and then reevaluate. Observe what is happening in Europe and if we decide to reopen the doors learn from their mistakes, or realize that a torrent of refugees is not what's right for the USA and leave only the traditional immigration path open. That is the most sensible option and the one that guarantees best that we handle it correctly. Rushing in trying to save the world like a bunch of big, bad heroes is often the preamble to a classic American tale of "oh god, what have we gotten ourselves into".

Look, you're not going to like this and I am begging to please not get emotional over it. But the whole umbrella of thoughtless quips like "your family were immigrants too!" or "immigration is what this country is built on" are propaganda. Really, the immigration that occurred when the USA was industrializing (or was in dire need of young Irish boys to die in the Civil War) is completely different than today. US Steel doesn't need 60,000 people working at its mill anymore. If you have ever argued against the rust belt voters for being delusional for thinking that the jobs of thirty years ago can be brought back today then you're committing the same sin when you appeal to this junk-tier 140-characters-or-less mindlessness about what America was built on. Times have changed. The population needs of the United States have changed. Unlike Europe the USA has a steadily growing population without bringing in people from overseas. Unemployment oscillates between slightly high and average levels, so its not like there is a labor shortage. Also, romanticizing refugees as the "innovators of tomorrow" is an unfair expectation to put on their shoulders and, to be frank, a little ignorant. My uncle sponsors of a Kurdish Syrian family. I've met them, they are good people. But none of them, including the children, speak even broken English (the father does speak bad French) and they are completely bereft of skills. Nothing against them as people, but we are hardly talking about keys the economic future of the United States here. So you're in favor of multiculturalism? Interesting. That's hardly the way that America has handled immigrants traditionally. Assimilation has always been the way the United States has handled things (the melting pot!), we dont have laws like Canada has forbidding English street signs. I'll keep your endorsement of multiculturalism in mind later, I have a feeling it'll become very relevant soon. I think we should take the decision to let refugees in extremely seriously and not just fling our doors open to the world because its what we did 100 years ago. Europe has real problems with their refugee populations not assimilating (I know this doesn't bother you, but it should) and its now causing some very real problems. I'm not just talking about the terror attacks, which really aren't that alarming anywhere except for France. I can get really specific and you'll probably get mad if I do, but suffice to say letting all these refugees into Europe has not gone particularly well for native Europeans or their governments. While you are carried away by the romantic idea of embracing all the worlds people in a post-borders utopia try to remember that the social policies of today and missteps in making them sow the seeds of tomorrow's social crisesl. Refusing to even acknowledge that Europe is having problems or that a lack of assimilation from immigrant groups is a very, very troubling sign is the type of ignorance that gets you into trouble down the road.

Yea just trade him. No offense Q love ya bro but this is bidness

I'm not sure I would. Red Sox- Ortiz/Betts Blue Jays- Donaldson Orioles- Machado Indians- Lindor Rangers- Beltre Nationals- Harper Mets- exception that proves the rule, though a case the White Sox may be able to emulate...harder to do in the AL though Cubs- Bryant Dodgers- Seager Giants- Posey, historically As you can see the postseason teams all seem to share one major thing in common, they have at least one MVP caliber talent in their lineups. Especially in the AL the road the playoffs becomes much easier if you have that guy, and without him things look much more bleak. I dont know why this is, but it just is.

Here's where you're kind of wrong/kind of right. Somali refugees in Minneapolis/St Paul have had some serious difficulties assimilating and there was an attack by a Somali on a mall that was "claimed" by ISIS. About thirty Somalis from Minnesota, permanent residents the lot, left the country to join ISIS or similar organizations back in Somalia, and that's just who the intelligence community knows about or is willing admit. Then there have been the serious gang problems and sexual assaults, very similar to the issues the European countries are having assimilating their immigrants. How much of this has to do with willful refusal to assimilate by the Somalis or ghettoizing by native Minnesotans is impossible to pin down exactly, but its probably a little bit of both at least. To paint all refugees as angels is a delusional. To paint them all as terrorists is ignorant. But to deny that there is something about Islam that seems to prevent it from fully assimilating its people in western countries is just a blatant refusal to acknowledge facts. All of Western Europe is a case study in this regard, and its one I want our leaders to learn and understand before they act on the refugee issue. We have enough social unrest as it is, inviting more in isn't good for the people already here. Libya is on the list already. And you can trace "lots of terrorism and its principal funding" to Lebanon? Uhhh...that'd be news to me. Hezbollah isnt a terror group, really. I mean Israel says they are and our government has a tradition of agreeing with them on those types of things, but that's a quasi-government representing Shia Muslims in that region. Lebanon is an extremely complicated country. You'd think the hubris would've been gone after Brexit and the November elections...guess not.

There will be some benefits to having them gone, plus Robin. Now it wont make up for their on field production but in some ways the Sox will be better next year just because they got rid of those two.

I've actually been thinking about this a lot lately. Its not just if Moncada flops the Sox are in trouble, if Moncada is anything less than one of the best 20 or so players in baseball the Sox are in trouble. You need that MVP-type talent in your lineup to win. Look at every playoff team this year. Only the Mets and Giants really lacked an MVP-type player this season (and Posey has been that type of guy historically). The Sox have only one blue chip prospect who has that kind of ceiling, it doesn't look they will be getting one for Quintana and unless they start really unloading players getting one from the 2018 draft is similarly unlikely. So it all falls on the shoulders of Yoan Moncada to be a superstar. I think Collins and Anderson are both going to be good players, maybe if were lucky they'll even find themselves in ASG or two by the time their careers are over, and the Quintana trade should net them a couple more like that. So should the #11 pick. But finding another blue chip guy is a difficult thing to do, and until the Sox have another one its all on Moncada or for someone to just come out of absolutely nowhere and surprise all of us. The flip side is if Moncada does hit his ceiling and the Sox do a reasonably good job developing these pitchers and putting a decent team around him they'll be a team clearly on the rise as early as 2018, if not this year.

Really the whole rebuild right now hinges on Moncada. I dont like the idea of building a roster that coddles one player, but in this case its imperative that Moncada is given every chance to succeed and become an MVP type player. If he doesn't the hill becomes a lot, lot steeper for the White Sox.

This was basically, though obviously not exactly, what was being said in October. Reminds me of that now infamous quote from Chuck Schumer (? may have been someone else) who said that for every one vote lost in rural Pennsylvania the Democrats would pick up two in the Philadelphia suburbs. It didn't happen, Trump gained on both fronts. He beat Romney's total in Pennsylvania by almost 300,000. Every dumb comment or outlandish policy position that was supposed to doom him with the Republican base fell flat, and now that he is fulfilling campaign promises at a rate I have never seen from any president you think he's losing their support? No way. He was elected to do this. The wall, the expansion of Obama's policies regarding refugees in MENA*...this is his mandate. The courts are going to walk back some of it (mainly the religious part) but the core idea that refugees will not be coming the USA is going to stick. For at least four, and I think unless Democrats buck up and get their s*** together eight, years this is just the reality of the situation. Honestly, that is not some colossal human rights violation or Hitleresque movement. Europe is in demographic crisis right now, I can fully understand both sides of the refugee argument. *this is a difficult point to refute. The Trump Admin got the list of seven countries directly from the Obama Admin's concern list. The ban itself is clearly modeled after the 2011 Iraqi ban. I said Trump resurrected Obama's policy earlier, that was a bit much, expanding is probably the right word to describe what is happening. He is expanding not only in scope but also in intensity.

Reese McGuire is a name from Toronto, originally Pittsburgh, that I have always had a soft spot for. Absolutely no power and no real hope of developing any, but the rest of the tools are there. He'll start the year at AAA at only 22 years old as a catcher.

Its the traditional base of the Democrats. They've been winning those states for literally decades. Best case scenario they took those votes for granted, worst case scenario the coastal elites villanized them as part of the great virtue signalling fad of the last 4 or 5 years. Either way, they aren't part of the base anymore and will probably have to be won back. Not a hill the democrats should want to climb.

This kind of contempt for people who have the audacity to disagree with you is assurance that they will never vote for your candidates. And if they never vote for your candidates electoral math basically guarantees that Donald Trump will win a 2nd term and maintain unprecedented control over congress for the next eight years. If that is what you want by all means, keep this up.

If the Yankees want to trade their top prospects for arms they will just trade for Jose Quintana themselves. I could maybe see a Rutherford-Glasnow swap happening due to proximity to the majors and flexibility of the Yankees needs, but even that seems far-fetched.

I have zero interest in Bill Maher and even if I had HBO I wouldn't watch his show, but if he's saying the same thing I agree with him.

Democrats are going to be too busy telling each other how great they are and taking selfies at protests to bother asking people in the rust belt for their votes. They're gonna get rolled again and ask themselves how on earth it could have happened. "Trump was so evil, didn't you see us on TV and social media telling you so?" There was a moment of clarity for about 48 hours after the result of the election dropped where everyone seemed to understand that the identity politics and political correctness of the left alienated the traditional bedrock of their party. Now were back at it again, having a level 10 freakout over Trump resurrecting Obama's old policies. Protesting on the streets of cities like Seattle, the poster child for "I like people who aren't white to be on my TV, not in my neighborhood", accomplishes nothing. In a way it helps Trump, because nothing grinds the gears of the working poor more than bougie liberals LARPing as activists while ignoring issues that have been brooding in the belly of this country since the 70's.

The Sox could easily make a deal with Houston as long as Tucker is on the table. Musgrove was never happening, because it never made sense for the Astros to trade him, and Martes was always take-it-or-leave-it for me. If the Sox aren't getting a true blue chipper like Meadows (and the injury risk on him is alarming) or Torres then I'd prefer a depth package that strengthens the Sox org at multiple positions. Demanding Martes just because MLB.com just ranked him at 20 ignores the rest of the Astros system which is definitely capable of making up for the exclusion of Martes with an inclusion of quantity. My favorite is still the Braves just because they have so many interesting things.

Theo Epstein is not trading Schwarber.

Swap out Lance Lynn (zero interest in Lance Lynn) for Delvin Perez and we've got ourselves something to talk about.