Balta1701

Guess who else lost yesterday. (And I mean directly lost, not like the O'Reilly indirectly losing because his party lost Congress way)

QUOTE(R.Sweeney @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 05:06 PM) Right and Im sure thats why BA didnt want to go in the first place .I understand that you do what the org. says but after struggleing through his rookie season he prob. just wanted some much neede rest which he ended up getting after all .I guess they dont have TUMMS down in Ven.. With the sorts of pathogens that could make one lose 20 pounds that rapidly...trust me, Tums don't do jack. Neither did anything else for that matter.

Misleading caption of the day:

QUOTE(R.Sweeney @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 02:02 PM) I have to disagree with you on Brandon but I do agree with you on J.T. Hes a great guy but he is getting older and it would make sense to get rid of him now while we can still get alot for him .The Angels are dying for a left-handed power hitter to back-up Vlady and that would help them and we could prob. get Figgins and a reliever or possibley Santana so we get the best of both worlds :pick up an OF with speed and a reliever all in one trade .If for some reason we were able to get I.Santana in the deal well thats just too bad....So long Freddy AND Javy. Jim Thome also I believe has a full no-trade clause. He had to waive that clause to come to the White Sox, and he indicated he was only willing to do so in order to go to Chicago or Cleveland last year.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 01:25 PM) A bunch of people are willing to trade 2 starters and live with him in our rotation as a 5th starter. I'm sorry but thats unacceptable to me. We want to win, I can live with breaking in Bmac but breaking in Bmac and Haeger well thats just not a way to win (unless you get lucky). I have no major problem with using him as our LAST guy out of the pen. It all depends on what you get with that extra starter you trade and $20 million freed up. If that turns into long term deals for Crede, Buehrle, Iguchi, and, oh let's say Soriano, and you turn both of those starting pitchers into something dynamite (Say you get Pelfrey, IIRC you were the one who loved him) plus a couple of other solid position player prospects...that puts you in a damn good spot for a long, long time.

In something that I think you simply have to say is the absolute definition of irony...the lawyers are heading to FL-13, Katherine Harris's former district, after the Republican won by 368 votes. Supposedly a recount has already been triggered by law, but may be impossible due to the fact that the voting machines don't produce a paper trail. And there are like 18,000 people who voted in that election but did not cast a vote for Congress (13% of the total voters). Beautiful.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 01:31 PM) How were we supposed to know our intelligence was bloody awful? We went in and at that point were comitted, imo. We run and we make a big failure bigger. I'd say differently if I thought the vast majority of the people were against what we've done in Iraq but the vast majority (imo) is glad we are there to help and that country is going in the right direction. Some of us were saying it was bloody awful a full 6 months to a year before the invasion. One good way to know it was bloody awful was to listen to the UNMOVIC inspectors. I believe, pre-invasion, one of them actually used the phrase "Garbage" to describe the intel they were getting from the U.S. Oh, and at least what polling data there is in Iraq seems to strongly contradict your statement. Here's one recent one i was able to find. I think the key note there is that out of the polling sample, a majority actually support attacks on the U.S. forces in Iraq.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 12:18 PM) However, its good to see McClintock and a few other repubs joining Arnold in Sacremento. Our new insurance comissioner is freaking awesome. Lieutenant Governor - California 24453 of 25231 Precincts Reporting Name Party Votes Pct Garamendi , John Dem 3,218,459 49.41 McClintock , Tom GOP 2,921,172 44.84 ????

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 12:22 PM) I think so far the GOP has made all the right moves in day 1 of a much more balanced Washington. Bottom line is if my party of choice doesn't make adjustments we could see serious democratic control starting with the next election. If they are smart they'll be very very willing to work with the democrats and basically go with a plan of letting the dem's dig there own hole (basically if the dem's really have no policy/idea it will really start to show if the repub's are very willing to work with the dem's). Of course if the dem's have some good ideas and they work well than they earned what would probably be a big time mandate in the future elections. However, considering the top leadership of the democratic party I still have my doubts as to if happening (but if it did, I won't have any problems). I just don't want us to cut out on Iraq and let the place go back to the stoneage's. We've done a lot of good there and it would be a travesty to just walk away and let it all go for not. That said I completely believe there should be a detailed plan of how we are going to start getting out of there. Yea, at least for a start, dumping Rumsfeld is the ideal Republican response to last night. I think that your second paragraph applies to both parties quite equally. The best example I can give of it is what happened in California; in 2005, the governor came out and decided that he was going to be a "my way or the highway" guy, and was going to take his stuff to the voters, and yada yada yada he got killed. Then look waht he did in 2006...suddenly he changed course, started pushing policies that were much more centrist, actually dealing with the legislature in a sensible way, and suddenly instead of gridlock, we wound up passing bond initiatives that are actually going to help the state (and save a few thousand lives, in the case of the levee repair). California is much, much better off after the rebuke in 2005 and course change by the governor than it would have been had Arnold won everything he wanted on 2005. Like I've been saying all day, there are plenty of things that this Congress can work together with the President on. There are going to be investigations, as well their should be, considering how little oversight the previous congress did. And there's probably going to be a major fight over executive power, as their should be. But there is still plenty of the people's business sitting around waiting to be done, business that hasn't been done thanks to the do-nothing congress we just voted out.

QUOTE(mreye @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 12:18 PM) I don't know how many seats they could have won. I just know they won plenty without a clear message. Just think what a good campaign woul dhave done. Heath Schuler is supposed to be pretty Conservative. Yes, Schuler is on cultural issues pretty conservative. But he's also, for example, giving a press conference with Sherrod Brown today for the United Steelworkers where they'll be talking about needing new trade policies and opposition to NAFTA. One of his key campaign messages was the loss of jobs due to free trade

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 11:02 AM) I actually like Riske in the mop up role. We need someone to take the load off of some of the more important bullpen arms. Based on the way ozzie Guillen has used his bullpen the last 2 years, we already have that guy. In fact, we have 6 of them, and one of them will be moved: Buehrle, Garland, Garcia, McCarthy, Contreras, Vazquez. Ozzie has used his bullpen by far the fewest innings in baseball the last 2 years. I don't see it making too much sense to start making sure we have mop-up inning guys when we really don't use guys like that.

QUOTE(Mplssoxfan @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 11:50 AM) Don't sleep on Mitt Romney. I think he has as good a shot as any Republican to win the 2008 Nomination. If I recall correctly, he's still the only major potential Repub nominee who has only been married once. I only point this out because he's also a Mormon, and I just find that hilarious.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 10:46 AM) UPDATE... CNN has called MT Senate - Tester wins. Webb is now claiming victory in VA, but a recount may be needed. That wouldn't happen until end of November at certification time, and only if Allen requests it. So as it stands right now, barring a recount in VA and reversal, the Dems have likely taken the Senate. And as quite a few noted last night...last year in VA, there was a recount in the Attorney general's race, which was decided by only a few hundred votes. The recount only wound up changing a few dozen votes...so at least there's some historical precedent for what that might do. And also, Allen calling for a recount would give the courts a chance to look at some of the tactics Allen's folks used...VA was I believe one of the centers of allegations of people calling minority voters and telling them their polling place had been changed.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 10:46 AM) Back to the cynicism issue. If you are listening to the conference you heard Bush say that even as he was telling reporters that Rummy was safe for the rest of the term he was really already looking for a replacement. And still the cause for our cynicism is questioned? Just in case you wanted the full quote. So this Gates guy: The bad: He's another of the Iran-Contra folks, just like a bunch of the other guys who have gotten us into this mess. He's also a Texas guy, another Bush confidant it appears, and another oil guy, which might limit his willingness or ability to tell the administration the things it needs to hear but hasn't listened to for the last 4 years. The Good: He's a member of James Baker's Iraq Survey Group or whatever they're calling it, the ones who are about to release a bunch of reccomendations on Iraq which say we need to do something other than "Stay the Course", suggesting he might at least have an understanding of how big of a disaster that is. He also has a masters degree from IU, and a former head of the national Eagle Scouts association. But at least he's not Rumsfeld. And no matter what he does, it's going to be pretty damn hard for him to be worse.

Former CIA head Robert Gates nominated in his stead. Thus keeping CFL in the Senate. I'll bet Joe's disappointed.

:::applause::: The AP is confirming. So...next move...Bush nominates Lieberman, Republican governor in Conn. gets chance to Replace Lieberman, Republicans control the Senate again?

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 09:18 AM) Pelosi's goals in her first days as speaker. 1. Adopt and fully fund 9/11 Commission recommendations. 2. Raise the minimum wage for the first time in 10 years. 3. Fix the Medicare prescription plan to allow the government to bargain for cheaper medicine prices. Real liberal agenda! If she doesn't put a bipartisan immigration bill and a lobbying reform bill on the list as well, she'll be missing a big chance. QUOTE(AbeFroman @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 09:38 AM) well said... Lots of reasonable, likeable, good republican candidates lost cause the did whatever the boss told them to. I'd bet that if those qualified republican candidates had spoken out against bush, there would be a lot more of them in Congress right now. There's a big difference between just speaking out against Mr. Bush and actively doing something that would hamper his policies, especially in Iraq. And sadly, the Pirate Party candidate was unable to pull off the upset in Iowa.

Yeah, so it's a little early...but in terms of solidifying...it's important. Class II - Senators Whose Terms of Service Expire in 2009 Senators in Class II were elected to office in the November 2002 general election. Their terms run from the beginning of the 108th Congress on January 3, 2003 to the end of the 110th Congress in January 2009. Democrats Baucus, Max Biden, Joseph Durbin, Richard Harkin, Tom Johnson, Tim Kerry, John Landrieu, Mary Lautenberg, Frank Levin, Carl Pryor, Mark Reed, Jack Rockefeller, John Republicans Alexander, Lamar Allard, Wayne Chambliss, Saxby Cochran, Thad Coleman, Norm Collins, Susan Cornyn, John Craig, Larry Dole, Elizabeth Domenici, Pete Enzi, Michael Graham, Lindsey Hagel, Chuck Inhofe, James McConnell, Mitch Roberts, Pat Sessions, Jeff Smith, Gordon Stevens, Ted Sununu, John Warner, John In 2008, the Republicans have 21 Senators up for reelection, and the Democrats have 12. The Democrats have a few possible retirees, including Biden and Kerry (depending on the 08 Pres race), and probably Lautenberg. The Repubs have a few more likely retirees; Stevens, Domenici, Warner are all good candidates. And they have several people who will be running in states where Democrats will have a good shot at knocking them off: Minnesota (Franken v. Coleman), etc. And the Dems have a bunch of governors right now who may just be waiting to challenge for a few of those seats.

Sweet, Pombo lost! Man, that guy was as bad as they come. Constantly inserting sneaky bills to try to destroy as big of a chunk of the public lands as possible and an Abramoff pal.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 06:56 AM) Now, the hard work starts. Now Democrats have to earn those votes back in 2008. Which means Pelosi needs to work on getting her agenda passed. Impeachment? Won't happen. Investigations? Hell yeah, and they need to happen too. I know I'm getting all Mr Smith goes to Washington hopeful here, but I think that there's gonna be an emphasis on doing the right thing in Congress for at least a few months, if not a couple years. More so than we've seen since 1997. And that can't be a bad thing. If the Democrats want to hold onto these gains in 2008 and beyond, then absolutely they need to do that. Or at least they need to try. Right now there's a bunch of obvious, bi-partisan bills that have been sitting around waiting because the Republican leadership wouldn't bring them to the floor unless their entire caucus was on board. Because of how little this Congress actually did, it's going to be really, really easy for the Dems to actually start pushing through compromise legislation. Prime example in my head? The President's immigration reform package, which was actually a fairly bipartisan proposal but which the Repubs wouldn't bring to the floor because a few of their congressional leaders wanted enforcement-only. The Democrats are stupid if they come into this with the same "50+1" attitude that Bush has tried to govern with over the last 6 years. Investigations are one thing, but the primary goal should be a flood of legislation. Fix the Medicare drug benefit. Increase the minimum wage. Actually pass a strong lobbying reform act. Pass a genuine immigration compromise. QUOTE(Texsox @ Nov 8, 2006 -> 07:53 AM) He already announced he will caucus with the Dems, which is the key. For now.

Well, at least thus far it already sounds like the White House is going to be gearing up for a fight...Reuters link It's still either Bush's way or the highway, at least based on the sound of that statement. No "We're looking forward to working with them", instead its "stand up or stop complaining". At least Pelosi paid lip service earlier tonight to working together/bipartisanship/the Center with the President at the start (before firing off plenty of red meat on Iraq to the crowd of course).

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Nov 7, 2006 -> 10:19 PM) Chone Figgins had a horrible year, but he straightened himself out eventually and started to hit better late in the year. He was also 52 of 68 in SBs, right around 76%. Juan Pierre was mediocre as hell, but he too atleast stole bases. 58/78, right around 74%. Podsednik was horrendous in the second half, and was 40/59 in SBs, or 68%, which is absolutely pitiful. Add to the fact that he was completely horrible defensively too, and I'd rather have Rickey Henderson leading off next year for the Sox rather than Podsednik. Once Ryan Freel was given a starting job after the Nats trade, he put up an OBP of .325 in August, and a .311 OBP in September, along with the fact that he's a lunatic. So, the difference between a 75% SB clip and a 68% SB clip, in 59 attempts, is 4 stolen bases. If Podsednik had been 44/59, you'd say he was ok? He'd basically have been Figgins with the bat and on the bases then. 4 stolen bases would have made that big of a difference so as to justify trading away something valuable, and potentially helping the Angels out in the process, in order to get Figgins? The only way plugging in Figgins makes sense is if you think he'll have a major rebound season next year. Yes he's better defensively, but he's not going to come to us for free, nor is he going to come as an even-trade for Podsednik, nor is he a free agent.

The Randy Johnson trade was supposedly pre-2005 and involved Paul Konerko, and if I recall correctly, some 17th round draft pick named Brandon McCarthy was included as a throw-in on that deal as well. I like our trophy better.

Man, finally, we have a couple races where it's going to be the Republicans demanding the recounts. Man, was I ever shocked to see both Webb and McCaskill pull ahead. 4 years of watching every state and hoping that would happen and failing to see it. South Dakota's near total abortion ban also went down to defeat tonight. Wow, in CA it looks like a lot of the propositions have a good shot at passing early. Hopefully a couple of those will turn around, especially prop. 90, that one is an absolute disaster waiting to happen. Thank God the Levee repair bonds look like they'll pass, if those failed we'd basically be asking for Sacramento to turn into New Orleans. QUOTE(Reddy @ Nov 7, 2006 -> 10:20 PM) love it, i truly think at the end of all this we will see a democratic house and senate. an amazing victory tonight I'm ECSTATIC! Wow, so this is what it feels like to not lose an election. I still enjoyed the World Series more.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 7, 2006 -> 06:47 PM) If that 20k makes a difference, then I suppose so. But some of those would have voted Green no matter what - not like they are protest votes. What is the 20k as a percentage thus far? Is it material? 1.11%. At least, if nothing else, Allen's Presidential bid died before it even got off the ground. Edit: Holy flurking schnit...the gap just closed to 1300 votes.