Balta1701

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 11, 2006 -> 09:08 AM) General Pancho Villa and a renegade band of the Mexican Army raided and briefly laid siege to a town in New Mexico in 1916. 1944, Japanese forces occupied 4 Aleutian Islands in Alaska, but they were virtually uninhabited. I don't believe that either resulted in civilian deaths on the scale of 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, though. In the middle part of WWII, the Japanese deployed thousands of "Balloon bombs", air balloons launched from Japan carrying explosives and inciendiary bombs, with the hopes of starting forest fires in the west. They failed, in part because they were launched outside of the fire season. They did wind up killing one family in Oregon though.

QUOTE(Steff @ Sep 11, 2006 -> 09:10 AM) No. Though I don't know which ones don't. And google doesn't seem to have a list of all that do or all that don't unless I'm just not using the right key words. User error this morning.. I'm quicker with Google than you...nyah nyah nyah. From a 2004 report from someone...

"See, it's not so bad when U.S. forces engage in torture...because other countries might do worse things!" Now there's some concrete logic if I've ever seen it.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Sep 11, 2006 -> 09:07 AM) Just a general question but, do all states have the lottery? "Once something's been approved by the government it's no longer immoral!"

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 11, 2006 -> 05:40 AM) No this is pretty much a double standard. I remember when Moore's movie came out, all of the stuff we heard about his being stifled, theaters didn't want to carry the movie, people were too busy tearing the movie apart to actually see it, there was too much spin control, they were trying to stifle this before an election... all of that stuff. The basic theme was that the evil neo-cons were trying to keep this poor individual from getting the truth out. Now the Clinton administration has an equivilant movie come out (and I use the word on purpose because they both seem to be able to be challenged factually depending on who you talk to. For every link that swears the conversation to not kill Bin Laden didn't happen, there are others who swear it did. In this situation we are taking the word of the people who looks the worst if it did indeed happen, so take that FWIW) Its always "different" when something like this kicks your idiology in the teeth. Republicians were outrages when Moore got away with it, and did everything to stop it, now the Dems are doing the exact samething. Yet somehow now it is different, even though all of the same basic arguements are being used (it isn't the "truth", what if people believe it, this is a politicial ploy, we are only trying to show how it "really happened" etc) No one is saying that this film shouldn't be shown or viewable. Or at least I'm not, I can't guarantee that no one is. But here's where the real double standard is coming in...Moore's film, people had to pay to get access to it. This film was broadcast for free over publically owned airwaves. You didn't have to pay to get access to it. In other words, it was a biased, partisan piece which went out over the public airwaves...within 60 days of an election even. Not to mention without commercial interruption. And then there's also one other double standard. Moore's film had a ton of trouble being released because the Disney corporation supposedly didn't want to have itself wind up at the center of a partisan debate. That led to F911 being moved outside of Disney and dealt with soley by the Miramax guys with an agreement to donate most of the proceeds to charities. Honestly, it was probably the correct move by Disney. But of course now, Disney spends $40 million to produce a partisan 9/11 documentary that it broadcasts over its own airtime, without any real hope of getting the money back through selling ad space. Same corporation...totally different response.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 10, 2006 -> 08:59 PM) Will the new family guy be on adult swim tonight? I had to miss it for a volleyball game. Last year, Adult Swim was able to get the new Family Guys either a week or a couple weeks after they were first shown on Fox. Not the same night though.

The 2nd tower collapsed at 9:29 CST. I didn't have any early classes that day, so my alarm went off at 9:30 CST. I still remember which song I woke up to that morning. The next time I heard that song was the day a month later where the other plane crashed in Brooklyn.

QUOTE(Mplssoxfan @ Sep 11, 2006 -> 08:44 AM) Isn't 9-11 already informally referrred to as Patriot Day. I've seen calendars that reference it that way, anyway. Linkity QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Sep 11, 2006 -> 07:36 AM) It should be remembered, but it shouldn't become a holiday for the same reasons December 7th isn't one. I believe you are correct.

The one thing about Brandon this season is that as a reliever, he's really not getting the chance to use his full arsenal that well. His best pitch is the changeup...it sets up every other pitch. But if he's coming out of the bullpen and just trying to throw strikes, he winds up being mainly a fastball/curveball pitcher, and that fastball is too straight and too slow for people to not hit it if they're looking at it. Also, I haven't seen much of that 2-seamer he was supposedly working on last offseason as far as I can tell.

QUOTE(Jeckle2000 @ Sep 10, 2006 -> 03:02 PM) How about we send his ass to the Tigers... Maybe they'd be stupid enough to use him... Yeah. Thank God we dumped Jason Grilli's ass on them too.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 11, 2006 -> 07:20 AM) Oh don't take that the wrong way. I am not giving up on Brandon, even for this year. I am just wondering with the amount of input Ozzie seemingly gets into player moves, and his dislike for Bmac in the first place, if we could see the unthinkable happen, and see Brandon moved for a guy like Crawford in Tampa. I don't think so, but stranger things have happened. Just ask Jeremy Reed and Aaron Rowand. If Kenny Williams were to make a movie like that...trading away McCarthy next season...while holding on to 5 high priced starters, 2 of whom have expiring contracts after 2007...my time praising his work as GM would rapidly come to an end. Getting a Crawford might win us a lot of games in 2007. But if the starting pitching struggled again...we'd find ourselves basically in the point at the end of 2007 of having to literally do a firesale just to try to rebuild. Otherwise, we'd be trying to find a new outfielder to replace Dye (doubtful we'd be able to hold onto Sweeney in such a deal, IMO), a new 2nd baseman, and at least 2 starting pitchers all on the Free Agent market, at the same time as Uribe, Garland, Crede, and a couple others get even more expensive. With the amount of $ that we're spending now, we can build a team that can contend every single year, with the one caveat that we need to occasionally work in a couple of young guys so that we can afford the veterans. If we don't do that, then the other option is to imitate the 2006 Cubs.

QUOTE(AssHatSoxFan @ Sep 10, 2006 -> 05:48 PM) berman and TJ will be doing their thing on the 11 ET sportscenter...they lost rights to do primetime when they lost the sunday night game Which btw, really really really really sucks. For all of us.

So, I'd just like to say...I REALLY MISS NFL PRIMETIME.

QUOTE(MSHAWKS @ Sep 10, 2006 -> 03:30 PM) We wouldn't have had to give him the $10M option in order to retain him. We could have given him the buyout and then an incentive laden contract for 2006. If I recall correctly, wasn't it quite a bit more complicated than that? I.e. to keep negotiating with Frank after the time his buyout was given, we'd have to have offered him arbitration, but the Sox were never going to offer him arbitration because salaries don't decline by 80% in arbitration, etc.

QUOTE(farmteam @ Sep 10, 2006 -> 09:58 AM) I want another Back to the Future. "Your daughter marries a black man!"

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Sep 10, 2006 -> 01:33 PM) Jesus Christ. Who gives a f***? If the American people are that impressionable, as to believe a miniseries which has basically been labeled as fictional for over a week, than the Democrats should do themselves a service and create some sort of rebuttal. Even if they were willing to believe it, are Americans somehow supposed to associate Clinton's indifference with future democratic candidates? Stop whining. Um, one question...can you tell me the last name of the person who is currently the presumptive front-runner for the Democratic Presidential Nomination in 2008?

QUOTE(azchisoxfan @ Sep 10, 2006 -> 12:21 AM) Dont look now, but Buerhle may be a large liablility. Whether it is mechanics or betwenn the ears, Beurhle spends too many innings throwing little more than batting practice to the opposition. I suggest if we elect to sign Buerhle, we do so with a reasonable guarantee of no more than 2K and the remainder subject to achieving numbers commensurate with big money. Take a look at Frank Thomas if you want to see what such a contract looks and can work like. Anyone that beleives Buerhle has earned his salary this year and is worth as much or more next year has no respect for $$$. Let's hope KW has learned something positive from the Frank Thomas situation. java script:emoticon(':gosox1:', 'smid_15') azchisoxfan You know, I understand the concern about Buehrle, after this season especially. But I think the overall odds are this: we're talking about a pitcher who has a career ERA, including his worst seasons, of 3.79, a career ERA of 1.25, and a best season of 3.12. I just can't believe myself to believe that suddenly Mark has gotten so much worse that a 4.80 ERA is what we can expect from him instead of the >3.79 that we've seen in previous seasons.

QUOTE(forrestg @ Sep 10, 2006 -> 12:05 AM) We all love Joe.. I know MLB players love to have some guaranteed money.. No one can deny he deserves it. We paid frank for like 3 years when he was rehabbing something or another.. GIve Joe a decent guaranteed salary and give him some incentives if he stays healthy.. He's already did more this year than what was expected ......................... As a business decision...there's only so much you can do before major surgery before you know that a player won't come back after the surgery just as strongly as beforehand. What happens if we sign Crede to a $9 million a year deal for 4 years or so, and then Crede's back surgery afterwards is unsuccessful, and we wind up paying $35 million for Crede while Josh Fields handles 3rd base for 3 years? You have to make sure Crede survives the surgery first. After that, you have to sign him for a long-term deal, and then you either make Fields an LF or you sell him. You're taking a risk...if Crede's surgery turns out fine, you save a lot of money signing him beforehand. But if you wait, you risk having him turn in another .300/30/100 season, and raise his per year value even more before signing him. Personally, on that salary, with a reasonable backup, I go the conservative route, say we have Fields, and we sign Crede long-term ONLY if it's cheap enough.

QUOTE(juddling @ Sep 9, 2006 -> 09:55 PM) I heard on the radio the other day some clips of Harvey Kietel who played in the movie saying things like "I always thought this movie was wrong" and " I had a feeling this wasn't right". Gee.....i guess it didn't stop Harvey from cashing the checks now did it?????? Harvey Keitel = Disney Corp? (And keep in mind, Disney seems to have invested $40 million with zero immediate return, clearly expecting a return somewhere along the line)

QUOTE(tealeafreaderii @ Sep 9, 2006 -> 11:45 PM) White Sox Show Ace Chicago thought it had assembled the best starting staff in the league this offseason, but on June 8 Jon Garland was 3-2 with a 6.20 ERA. With Saturday night's 10-8 win over the Indians, the Sox starter has put together a 14-2 run with a 2.76 ERA, and the Sox remain one-half game behind the Twins for the AL wild card. Story | Watch if he can do that for a whole season... or hell even 3/4th of a season we are talking cy young right now. If Jon Garland, Mark Buehrle, and Jose Conteras never wind up winning a Cy Young award amongst them, I will simply be shocked. I was blatantly wrong this year, maybe because of the long playoff run last year, maybe because of poor coaching, maybe something else, but I thought 1 of those 3 was going to win the Cy this year before this season started. I think one of those guys has a real good chance of winning one of those tropies next year as well...if they find a way to heal up in the offseason. On paper, right now, this is still the top rotation in the league in 2007, even if the key guys only do their career average numbers, and no one has a career year in 2007

As far as I know, the "rolls" of the die haven't happened yet. They will roll dice to determine home field advantage for each potential playoff game at some point, this week I would guess. In the event of a 3 game playoff, the team that won 2 rolls would play the 2nd game. The teams that lost at least 1 roll would play in the first game. The winner of the first game would be in. The loser of the 1st game would play the other team in a single game, on the road. The winner of that game becomes the 2nd playoff team.

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Sep 9, 2006 -> 11:15 PM) It's going to be interesting to see what we do at 3rd in the future considering Crede is going to have another back surgery. I think Crede's back situation means that the statement one could have made last season even stronger: Josh Fields will not be traded away until Mr. Crede proves he's healthy and signs a long-term deal, unless a very, very good deal comes along.

So...I was watching the whole game, start to finish,occasional channel flipping... top of 9th, watch the whole thing Bottom 9...buy ever second I can, watch until Konerko hits that lined shot to left field... I had to go pick the Fiancee up from work. She wanted picked up at 9. I left at 8:53 for an 8 minute drive. I left before AJ took a single swing.

I love these guys. They've hurt the United States of America so much...we'll be regretting their idiocy for decades.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Sep 9, 2006 -> 09:50 PM) that makes sense. If we can get a good deal for Cotts, we trade him. If we can't get a good offer, we could Just let Logan develop more in AAA, and see if Cotts can bounce back. If Cotts sucks it up, we could always DFA him and call up Loagn. DFAing Cotts is probably a bad idea. Look what we got for Javy Lopez in the middle of this season. Even if we can't get what we want for him this offseason...we can always drop the price early next season if he's still struggling and take what we can get. Someone will give us something for a bullpen lefty no matter how much he's struggling, especially during a season.