jackie hayes

Toronto Star story. I loved The Death and Life. RIP.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 24, 2006 -> 10:17 PM) DO you know how much crap BigMac would have gotten if he said "I cant wait to pass the black guy Aaron. i dont car about Ruth. i want the black guy"? He'd have been beaten to a pulp. But Bonds says he wants to only pass the white guy because he donst like white guys... nothing is said. What a double standard! Since basically everyone here obviously knows this quote, I'm not sure where you get the idea that the press swept this under the rug. It's been talked about quite a bit. And laughed at quite a bit. Ruth>>>>>>>>>>>everyone, including Bonds, doesn't matter if he gets more hrs. That Bonds doesn't recognize this is funny, not controversy. Though Bonds didn't actually say that "he doesn't like white guys".

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 24, 2006 -> 02:57 AM) I'll keep my eyes peeled. Yah, me too, it's always good to know when you should start walking the other way.

Next thing he'll tell us is a splitter doesn't actually split into 2 parts to avoid the bat. Moron. I have The Physics of Baseball too. It's a fun little reference.

QUOTE(Jeckle2000 @ Apr 21, 2006 -> 08:21 PM) Did you even read what I typed... If you can't agree that Rowand has a better swing then Anderson then your in some serious denial... Oh, I'm sorry, Jeckle. I agree, Rowand's swing is beautiful. It should be in a museum. Now do you want to talk about baseball?

QUOTE(Jeckle2000 @ Apr 21, 2006 -> 07:59 PM) Watch the Phillies game right now if you have extra innings... AROW's stance helps him keep a shorter swing... No he's no Joe Dimaggio but: AROW's swing >>> Anderson's swing Omfg, your idea of reasonableness is admitting that he's not JOE F'N DIMAGGIO. I am speechless. I am without speech.

Priest Holmes reportedly NOT done. Ummm... He was fun to watch, but enough's enough. I don't like seeing anybody risk that much.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Apr 21, 2006 -> 05:33 PM) I don't believe Sam was referring to the accuser. Rather, the accuser's colleague orginally told police she doubted the alleged rape occured. It was only after the defense team released photos of the supposed victim she changed her mind. Reading her quote, she wasn't there--has no proof--yet believes something occured. Funny how she would never admit raped occured, yet in the next sentence replies: "In all honestly, I think they're guilty." Well, what exactly are they guilty of stripper #2? One of my favorite Will & Grace quotes -- "You know how I know? Because I really, really think so."

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 21, 2006 -> 08:44 AM) Again, it's at least worth considering that yes, everything from the defense is easy to verify, but we have no idea how easy to verify the prosecution's evidence might be, because they're not leaking. I was just responding, and Rex didn't say anything about the prosecution. Yes, it's from a party that has a definite position. If it were vague evidence, I'd take a wait and see approach. But with that much detail, it's pretty strong evidence. Which isn't to say it's literally impossible that it's wrong. There are 2 separate sources of timing information, iirc. The prosecution will have to discredit both. Of course, that may be possible. I'm not saying the prosecution has nothing, but remember that the 2 sets of information cannot be independent. Maybe he has something, but unless you think the defense is literally forging all this evidence and pressuring witnesses, how do you figure this could be consistent with the receipt, phone calls, dorm access, etc?

QUOTE(Sam @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 11:43 PM) Life...without it -- there's no money. Mike Sirotka or James Baldwin? Baldwin. Shakira or Christina Aguilera?

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 05:24 PM) lol yeah. Are we still doing this or should we just forget about it? Can we say officially that this blew donkey balls? I still think it's a good idea. It just wasn't done well here.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 09:58 PM) Everything we're seeing is from the Defense, correct? Well, its a nice distraction from the Chinese premier making a visit to the White House despite keeping American media employee prisoners and persecuting Christians and other religious leaders. From the defense, but specific and easy to verify. They claim they have cell phone records, and an atm receipt, and campus records. And the cab driver was on CNN saying, yes, I drove that guy. He's not a defense lawyer, as far as I know.

I don't think the Nats would trade Ryan Church for a halfdecent prospect... QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 04:33 PM) I doubt that, but even if they want to move him, they'll get a better offer than some generic midlevel prospect. Even if they loathe the guy, they're not that stupid. But santo offers a compromise proposal... QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 06:44 PM) What if we threw in a 12 pack and a designated driver for Bowden?

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 06:44 PM) What if we threw in a 12 pack and a designated driver for Bowden? Oh, that's good. Yeah, I don't mean to give Bowden too much credit. Guzman -- what else do you need? But sending down Church was one of the most surprising moves of this year's st. Everyone knows his promise. They couldn't fail to see that and value it higher than a AA filler.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 05:45 PM) Now if y'all don't mind, this will be moved to SL&M, where it belonged. Curses! Foiled again! Sorry, I've just really wanted to say that, and I think that's the best in I'll get.

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 04:14 PM) Stern has finally fulfilled his rule-5 requirements and will be back leading off and playing centerfield for Pawtucket, with Harris his replacement. WHarris1. It's his turn now. Fixed.

QUOTE(ThinWhiteDuque @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 04:21 PM) They aren't committed to him at all. They don't like him...I almost think it's on a personal level. All he needs is a few bad games, and they'll be looking to move him. I doubt that, but even if they want to move him, they'll get a better offer than some generic midlevel prospect. Even if they loathe the guy, they're not that stupid.

QUOTE(Beltin'Bill @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 04:15 PM) Not making fun of you at all. Just curious. I like the notion that I am stalking you, though. That would be a nice subtle question to help me continue my complete profile of you before I start camping out at all the places you frequent on a daily basis. By the way, no need to freak out over this stuff. You picked a fun topic so have fun with it. Be careful, man. All that stuff about guns? Take the hint.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 03:14 PM) With all the direction and tutelage Beltin' has given you, I hardly think he's making fun of anything. But he may be stalking you. That's his actual pic in the avy, so watch out for that guy. Fwiw, I decided I do believe in curses. After all, you're posting again.

QUOTE(fathom @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 12:02 PM) BTW...let it be known that I'm not giving up on Anderson. I think he has the potential to be better than Rowand. It's just discouraging to see someone so clueless at the plate right now. What are you talking about? How are you not giving up on Anderson when you've given up on the whole Sox team? Imeanitssoobviousjustlookatwhatyousaidlastyear.

QUOTE(maggsmaggs @ Apr 19, 2006 -> 09:55 PM) They just showed him and it appears he is okay, just needed some sugar. PA: Attention, ladies and gentlemen. Attention. Jason Johnson needs some sugar in his bowl. Jason Johnson -- needs some sugar -- in his bowl. Anyone willing to provide Mr Johnson (yes, Johnson) with some sugar, for his bowl, please meet the medical staff at the secondary entrance. Thank you for your most prurient attention. At least hell is warmer than most Chicago winters.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Apr 19, 2006 -> 08:57 PM) Chili minus beans equals Sloppy Joe. Fine by me. I'd eat the best Texas chilis on bread, on almost anything. Just not on a Chicago dog. Or a gyro. Or a Chicago pizza. A guy (reminder: jackie is a guy) has got to have some principles.

Authenticity=no beans. This isn't even up for debate.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 03:36 PM) One thing I want to throw out here -- I tend to be sceptical when race is thrown out as a motivating issue. For example, when the whacko from Georgia who thinks she can ignore Capitol security cried racism. But a few things in this case made it sound likely here. And the remark about flaying only reinforces that. It's amazing how sick a subculture can become. It's Lord of the Flies for post-pubes. QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Apr 19, 2006 -> 05:30 PM) One last thing, in my opinion the biggest thing about this case is that white people do not want to believe that rich white Duke students would want to rape a poor black stripper. Hell if this was black student athletes and a white stripper, the public would have them guilty before the trial even started. Okay, I'm white, and here's my quote from over a week ago. I was willing to believe the charges, in fact I did believe them, but when the facts change, etc. I think the biggest thing on either side is the race issue. Many blacks in Durham don't like the idea that white athletes at a rich school feel entitled, and many whites don't like the insinuation that they would condone rape as long as it's done to a black girl. There's some vague social truth in each position, but in this particular case, one party is right and one party is wrong. As of now, her case looks weak. So if you want your "biggest thing" to speak for yourself, fine. But leave me the f*** out of it.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Apr 19, 2006 -> 05:03 PM) Hes being elected in 2 weeks? So your position is that if that the only reason the DA is charging these people is for the election? Because if that is the case after he is re-elected he will then drop the charges. If you are wrong, after he is re-elected he will continue with the case. I say the latter will happen. I thought that his election was in the normal time period (November or so) so that the trial would be under way. The Democratic primary is May 2. Not the election, but the primary, and he has 2 challengers for that. I'm not a good message board gun-slinging type, but I think it's a pretty fair suspicion. I think it's a little naive to say that the day after the election he'd drop the case. Yeah, all prosecuters want a good percentage. But this is just one case, with national coverage a million times greater than anything else he'll cover. He won't risk looking like a politician on this one huge case just for the 1/10 of a percent effect it'll have on his overall percentage.