Reddy

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 06:26 PM) Good for other countries in the world. When they become the lone superpower they can talk, I dont give a s***. Its my right as an American, not my non-right as a non-American. EDIT- I have to run, I'll respond to this liberal nonsense later tonight when I get off work. we, um... sigh... fantasy land must be a nice place.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 05:30 PM) And what a solution it has been! Clearly, there are no examples in the world of gun laws in other countries that has led to lower gun violence. We can only compare things to alcohol and drunk driving, which liberals wouldn't want to curb because they drink and are lazy. Meanwhile conservatives don't want to regulate law abiding citizens, except gays and women. that, my friends, is what we call a curb stomp.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 03:31 PM) 5 ok... yeah... but that's just your opinion. no REASONABLE person would argue for any number other than 4. that's a FACT.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 03:41 PM) I prefer a much more rounded routine with alot of change day to day because I feel it gives you a much more well rounded physique and caloric burn, however if you are looking for growth, focus is invaluable. agreed

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 01:25 PM) This is a straight forward personal attack that's against the message board guidelines. that's not a personal attack...

You know, marty, additionally here's something to think about. Generally speaking, when one holds an opinion, he should feel free to express that opinion. Upon said expression, if he finds that he is alone in holding that opinion, and that everyone else in the conversation holds a different viewpoint, he can do one of two things. He can keep belaboring his opinion and block out any other viewpoints, OR he can step back and evaluate WHY he's the only person who feels that way. He can examine the other opinions and see if, maybe, he may not have all the information. Which do you do marty? When it's one person against the world, there's probably a good reason so many people disagree with you... EDIT: I was writing this while wite said back to baseball, so back to baseball I shall go.

so Marty is really Milla Jovovich rockin' a boy's haircut. love it.

so much win in that post.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 01:17 PM) You're all about the personal attack. A QUACK ATTACK!

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 01:15 PM) Why do you make stuff about the messenger. You do this to most you disagree with. out of curiosity, who anointed you the messenger?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 01:07 PM) That's why they are a run-of-the-mill outfit. yeah just like those damn Tampa Bay Rays, and those Oakland Athletics, and those LA Angels, and I could continue with more teams that build for the future AND the present at the same time.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 12:55 PM) Why is developing Viciedo more important than giving the team the best chance possible to compete for a postseason spot? why do you think the team can't do both? please answer that question!! a .750 OPS is not sinking this team! lol

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 12:52 PM) You are also completely dismissing what the original context of that post was. But let that be damned as well. he's been hurt for four years? and can be great when healthy?? dude's a really solid #3, but that's all he is. I love John Danks, but he's not a "great" pitcher. he's good.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 12:48 PM) I'm guessing his 138 OPS+ his second year in the big leagues. That was very close to what Sale put up last year (142). yep. what a player did 5 years ago is usually highly indicative of his future success, last four seasons be damned!

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 12:46 PM) By this logic, the Sox must find a platoon partner for Adam Dunn, too. I don't see why you are so hung up on Viciedo. The Sox (or just about every other team for that matter) cannot afford to ensure that they get maximum production out of every position. and they're still getting a .750 OPS out of a 23 year old for zero money... I'd say that's a win regardless of splits.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 12:37 PM) Quit turning on the messenger. I can't make Viciedo hit RH'ers. Viciedo is not the be all and end all of our contention. why do you think that??

QUOTE (Baron @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 12:34 PM) Can we please not start this crap again? i haven't been following the thread - has Marty been arguing this for a while? EDIT: ah, nevermind.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 12:33 PM) Don't know who is available and don't know their payroll situation, but if they think they can contend Viciedo can't get regular AB's v. RH'ers. i don't think you understand baseball. the orioles made the playoffs with Robert Andino playing second base. .588 OPS .211 BA

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 12:30 PM) lol John Danks is a good to great pitcher. based on what?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 11:40 AM) The way it's sold to consumers, it's doesn't really exist. You aren't confusing anything. Overloading a muscle is what makes the muscle grow, period. You don't have to change up your workout to continue making a specific muscle grow...all you have to do is continue overloading the target muscle. Changing workouts prevents people from getting bored of the same routines, thus they stop pushing themselves without really realizing it. The problem with the term is that it's sold as a method of "preventing plateau", by "confusing" the muscle, when that's not what it really does. If you want to consider muscle confusion as simply changing up to different exercising, that's fine...but that's not what they sell it as. which... prevents... your... plateau...

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 11:52 AM) It's an opinion, since not ALL guns are designed for such purposes. Some are. Some are not. So like I said, thank you for proving me right with your open mindedness on what constitutes an opinion of the ONLY intended use for a gun. You made that easy. ugh the semantics with you. fine. guns are designed with the soul purpose of killing animals. humans are animals.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 10:55 AM) And absent some blanket ban on a type of gun, like handguns, that's not going to happen. And I think that kind of ban would be unconstitutional. It's not narrowly tailored being that it's an outright ban on a product nor is the least restrictive means of solving a problem that isn't caused SOLELY from the availability of guns. so because YOU think nothing will help but a ban, and that a ban is unconstitutional, we should......... just do nothing? chalk this up to "s*** happens"? then i nominate you to say that to the parents of those kids.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 10:51 AM) Please point me to the legislation on the books that outright bans your ability to have alcohol, cigarettes and a vehicle, no matter the situation. did ANY of us suggest that with guns? i sure didn't.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 10:42 AM) But cut that number in half, at least, for the people who deliberately kill other people because they're gang members and criminals. And also ignore the amount of people that die from other random acts of violence, from DUI's, from cigarettes, from whatever else we as society accept because it's an acceptable loss to allow us to do X. and guess what? we legislated DUI's AND cigarettes! Guess it's time we do it with guns too!

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 10:16 AM) But by doing that you're restricting the right of 99.9% of people for the sake of .01%. We don't do this with any other issue where death is an unfortunate result and we know it'll happen. It's all based on people like Balta who fear they'll just be randomly shot by vigilantes in the streets. I'd imagine your odds are better at winning the lottery than being a victim of a stray bullet or intentional gun crime like Newton. 30,000 people.