jackie hayes

Sox down 6-0 Podsednik leads off, out to pitcher Iguchi down 0-2, stretches to 2-2, battling, Edit: k Reynoso warming in pen Weeks playing 2b for the Brewers

Hr by Krynzal (sp? -- I have no clue), off Takatsu, down the line.

QUOTE(professionalfan @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 09:34 PM) who thinks our bullpen will be consistent this year? I think, maybe, you meant to quote a different post. I think we'll have a good bullpen. Adding Vizcaino and Hermanson just solidified it. It's not elite, but there's enough depth. The rotation's more of a concern.

First time I've heard this Jacobs Twin Ford (sp?) ad. So stupid it's funny.

QUOTE(robinventura23 @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 09:27 PM) I'm starting to get a little worried about Marte. Eh, he's been awfully good for 3 straight seasons, imo it's nothing to worry about at this point.

QUOTE(professionalfan @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 09:25 PM) any errors? E on Rowand -- mishandled (kicked?) the ball.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 09:22 PM) Marte pitching like s***. What happened? Gameday Audio just crapped out on me for a bit.

Willie does badly -> half the posts are about how much he sucks, hope we can trade him Willie does well -> half the posts are about how much he sucks, hope we can trade him This is already so old.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 01:31 AM) The first season there were 2 Huh -- I only remember one. His parents are visiting him, though that could be true for both, for all I know. Oh well.

QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ Mar 24, 2005 -> 09:53 PM) He was actually the second Morty, and much better than the first. He played the Morty character to the perfect pitch. He will be missed. That's what I thought, but the article claims he was the third Morty -- ?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 24, 2005 -> 10:03 AM) Jackie, I was not commenting on her exact situation, but adressing the quoted comment that brain cells do not grow back. Sorry for the confusion. If you study stroke victims, people with injuries, etc. That is what happens. Of course if there isn't healthy cells available, that would not be possible. But since you seem to want to jump on everything I write, have at it. :banghead Whatever. Steff was clearly referring to her specifically, and her brain: QUOTE(Steff @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 11:26 PM) Brain cells don't grow back.. she is never going to improve. Your direct response to this was: QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 24, 2005 -> 12:06 AM) What happens is other areas of the brain take over for the damaged areas. Since Steff was specifically speaking about Schiavo, and you responded to this without any caveat (like, yes you're completely right, but it is an interesting factoid that in totally different cases other parts of the brain take over certain functions), it is at least awfully misleading. I'm hardly jumping on everything. (Look at how many posts you've had in this thread -- I've disagreed with you directly twice iirc.) I dropped out of the whole exchange earlier. But the idea that what remains of her brain can handle somehow the functions that were destroyed is flat wrong -- all I did was point that out in plain language. Sorry if you felt attacked, but I don't honestly see how you get that from my posts. Edit: And, it'll please you to know, I'm out of this thread.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Mar 24, 2005 -> 04:11 AM) I believe Terri is brain damaged to an extent that she has lost some degree of cognizant function & to a larger degree motor function. That's evident in her paralysis. But no one on this planet can say with certainty that a specific area of the brain controls a certain motor function or cognizant function. We don't possess that knowledge. We possess knowledge of generalizations. But all brains are unique. From what I know our general knowledge of the brain is that it is resilient in that it will compensate for damages. Exactly how it does that or to what extent it does that we don't know. In the year 2005 we still don't know how our brain formulates words or drives us to speak & think. We have a general sense of what area of the brain controls that but we don't know anything for sure. Most brain surgery today deals strictly with the physical nature of the brain. It's not dealing with restoring brain functions but rather obvious brain impairments. We use tech to see that which is threatening & we attempt to correct it. There is so much utter garbage here -- the idea that noone has any idea what part of the brain does what, the suggestion that it may differ from person to person ("all brains are unique"). And then, you claim that all this will be figured out in a few years and we'll be able to replace it with computers. Unbelievable. Key here is "From what I know," which is zero. Doctors (you know, they went to medical school?) have said that much of her brain is filled with fluid, and that she'll never recover memory or thought. But if Jugghead thinks o/w, well... I don't know if you're remarkably ignorant (yet stubborn) or just flat out lying. Either way, you're wrong. So stop spreading this crap under the heading of "I believe" and "From what I know". Although for those who read regularly, it is fair warning. Good God.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Mar 24, 2005 -> 01:07 AM) Change is hard cuz it's made of metal. Paper money is much softer. You're welcome. That is just awesome.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 24, 2005 -> 12:06 AM) What happens is other areas of the brain take over for the damaged areas. Brain cells are a use it or lose proposition which is why his refusing basic things like taking her outside and holding a wet towel, are so objectionable. It is far easier for me to side with the parents on motives. Would anyone here want to care for Terri for the rest of your life? The husband is free. It seems like he wins of he gets his way, if the parents get theirs, they are in for a lot of work. Not true, at least in this case. From webmd, a doctor at the Univ of Rochester: Here's the link.

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 11:54 PM) Becuase of one or 2 good moves KW has done, we should all bow down to all the f*** up this guy has made over the past 4 years.. Man Wake up.. This is the first year he actually done something for this team in regards to a "shake-up". Which should have happeend after 2002 when we fail to win the Division.. Back then I was calling for his head, to be fired, he got Colon and Koch.. But giving up the best closer in the AL..in Foulke. One would wonder why the A's would just so easyly give up such a "great" Closer in Koch and a propect(sp), for a non-closer.. HMMM.. The man is over his head, has no idea what or how to do things... Another case and point.. We get Iguchi for what we ask, yet overpay on Hernandez.. who hasn't pitched 200+ in in over 2/3 years.. and oo BTW is a fly ball pticher in Coors lite.. While the likes of Clement and Lowe were still out there, and are grounball pitchers something needed at the Cell. :banghead Enuf... Btw, "case in point".

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 11:42 PM) So KW is not a failure as a GM... HMM How many Divsion Title? How many AL penants? How many WS apperance/Wins?? ALso how is it that over the past 4 years as him as GM, we played in the weekest division in baseball, yet he could never managed to put a team on the field to win it? WOW. You win the award for acting as though you're replying to something when you're saying NOTHING about the post. And NOTHING in general. You will cram that 'KW sux' square peg into every circle you can find. The same damn thing over and over, even after he made a pretty questionable decision in doing something you wanted (getting Pods). Again, WOW.

QUOTE(Jabroni @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 11:00 PM) I'd rather have Carlos than Maggs right now but I still think Carlos has a bit of an attitude problem himself. Who goes after an ex-teammate like that? How could Lee not know that Marte can be a bit wild sometimes, especially when he goes in on everyone? Well, I don't believe all the 'attitude problem' stuff about Carlos, but that's jmo, and that was already debated ad nauseum. And in this case, if the Brewers' announcers were certain that it was a plunk, I'm not saying they're right, but there's at least some room for doubt (I'm not watching the game). Especially on the first pitch, after a hr, I'd just say that this is a pretty natural misunderstanding.

QUOTE(Jabroni @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 10:55 PM) I wonder what Carlos thinks about our offense without him. Y'know... Carlos said all the right things when he left, didn't badmouth the organization or anything. I don't see where the righteousness comes from. There's probably more said smugly towards Carlos than Maggs, who b****ed ENDLESSLY after getting his many, many, many millions. Why???

QUOTE(Jabroni @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 10:50 PM) Did we sign Antonio Osuna? It's Ozuna. I thought the use of the words "motors" and "fast" were good enough to clear up any confusion between the 2.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 10:41 PM) I wouldn't say that we "didn't need" our best overall player from last year... I was thinking the same thing. But then, we better hope we don't need him.

QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 10:36 PM) Now Carlos Lee wants to get tough, where was he when Tori Hunter was plowing down our players. Thats why he's playing in milwuakee. Then why isn't the rest of team in Milwaukee? And why is Oz still here, since he took responsibility for any retaliation upon himself after the game? This was just a bs excuse.

QUOTE(Jabroni @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 10:29 PM) I really think Ozuna's problem was when he went from 26 years old to 30 in one day. He lied about his age and no one wants to bring up a 30 year old instead of a 26 year old. They probably figure he has already reached his peak and will be on the decline. Which he probably has -- I buy the idea that players peak around 29. But it's not like 30-mid 30s is a huge step down from that. Getting a pretty good shortstop cheap -- even if he'll never be a star -- is smart baseball. But again, I just wanted to throw the question out there. I don't know much of anything about Ozuna in particular.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 10:13 PM) I know but I'm just saying both were old for the minor leagues but always produced, same thing in that respect. I wonder if age isn't almost always overrated -- at least up until players really start to decline, mid 30s or maybe a touch earlier. The idea seems to be that if someone has played extremely well and not been called, there must be SOMETHING wrong with him. It's not as if there're hidden volumes on these players. I'm just not so quick to discount the possibility of a bad organization, or other reasons -- maybe a vicious cycle of being too old leading to leaving the guy in the minors, making him yet another year older. I don't know -- anyone seen something that looks at this? I've been thinking about it since all the 'Rogo is too old' stuff at the start of st.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 02:44 AM) I do not believe I ever said only the childless, I mentioned the people here who posted the most times to allow her to die, are all childless. I also pointed out that every person I spoke with in the real world that was pro-death, was also childless. So my conclusion is being a parent may alter ones opinions. IMHO seeing your baby for the first time, holding them in a quiet house late at night, changing diapers, teaching them to walk, ride a bike, staying up late when they are dating, sending them off to college, walking your daughter down a wedding aisle, all are included in some people's opinions. If you believe that wouldn't effect your judgement, who am I to disagree with how you believe you will feel. You may be able to give life to someone, then turn over their life or death to another person sho has "moved on with his life" and is only staying involved to see that she dies. Right, exactly, I "may be" a cold hearted ass who doesn't care if his child dies. That's entirely fair. I'm saying I've spoken to parents -- also in the real world -- who believe that her parents have to accept that their daughter is gone. So the unanimity you're claiming is wrong. Or they must be heartless bastards, right? After all, any parent who loves their kid must ignore all respectable medical opinion because a miracle might happen. Or...they could say, these doctors have more expertise than me, and they all say there's no hope -- none. And as much as I loved my child while alive, she's gone now, and I am going to have to come to grips with that. Nah, they've got to be psychopaths. That's a much better explanation.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 01:33 AM) As I stated, I believe that being a parent changes a person's thinking. So I accept that I bring that bias to my opinion. Are you stating that being a parent would not effect your thinking? Would you then also argue that being religious would not effect your opinion? The "husband" wants to determine her fate. He wants to claim spousal rights, while living with someone else. Steff mentioned it was unconditional love, I disagree. IMHO unconditional love would have me at my wife's bed side, not starting a new family. It makes a mockery of his marriage, and the vows he took. I would have more respect for him if he said, Terri would want me to go on with my life, her parents are willing to accept the responsibility for her care, so I am filing for divorce and allowing her parents to care for her. Steff said that because Terri needs a feeding tube Terri is on life support, and Terri did not want to be on life support. I countered that Terri's brain capability if a far more compelling reason to killing her quickly. Many people have found themselves relying on feeding tubes and are not terminal. Keeping her alive, at worse, is no benefit and at best may allow a miracle to happen. Killing her, at worse, ends a life, and at best ___________________? Someone want to fill in the blank? Tell me how Terri benefits by dying? The same people who wish her a speedy death, claim she has no brain activity and can not sense pain. Remember no anesthesia was used when they removed the feeding tube. Something that is standard in a fully functional person. I am saying that being a parent does not necessarily change one's views on this issue. Not that it doesn't change your thinking on any issue one iota. You suggested that only the childless support the decision to let her pass, and that's flat wrong. As for being religious, it depends on your convictions. And it depends on hers. This general Catholic thing is weak, though. The majority of American Catholics support abortion rights, etc, and still consider themselves devout. Substituting Catholic doctrine for Schiavo's thoughts is unconvincing. You didn't address my point. Many people don't believe his wife exists anymore. (Memory, thought -- these strike me as essential in defining identity.) He can sit by her body, but he's not sitting by her. So imo this is not cheating, just moving on. "Till death..." She died many years ago. I don't think Steff was saying we should have all people on feeding tubes pulled, but she can correct me if I'm wrong on that... If she wanted to pass rather than be kept 'alive' in this way, then her memory is harmed by keeping her tissue alive. That's how she benefits. Certainly if my brain had mostly disappeared and been replaced by fluid, that's what I would want. Perhaps that's not important to you, but it would be to me. Frankly, the ONLY hope she has is a miracle. So, if you believe that God every once in a while violates the rules of science for stuff like this, then I can understand your position. But then you should lobby hard to require that all measures are taken to preserve life, always, in the event of a miracle. I don't believe anyone's ready to do that. There was an article in the Trib today about removing feeding tubes, that this is neither an unusual nor painful practice in terminal patients.