Balta1701

QUOTE(samclemens @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 09:03 AM) you are pretty much right, I think. but the israelis could do it, thats what i am hoping for. they certainly have the justification in my opinion. They're about the only one for whom the strike would even be remotely possible, since having the U.S. do it via airstrikes would probably cause the downfall of the U.S. in Iraq, and lord knows how many casualties. It's entirely possible that Israel attacking Iran would cause it as well, but at least in that case it's not 99% like it is with the U.S. The problem of course is that an Osirak type attack doesn't work with Iran, because what we do know about their facilities is that they are spread out and hardened to either prevent or at least prolongue such an attack to a length that would really threaten the operation. And I'm not totally sure, but I think Iran's air defense system is at least capable of doing some damage, unless it's hit with something as strong as a full scale U.S. assault. And beyond that, if you guys are worried about Korea shipping things to Iran...having Israel attack Iran does nothing to prevent that, and in fact might even encourage it.

Keep it up Mark! We need you badly here. Also, interesting note, for anyone who is interested...Chone Figgins has the lowest OBP of any leadoff hitter in baseball.

You know what I think it is that bothers me most about Podsednik? He seems to have skills but doesn't seem to use them effectively. He has the skill that should allow him to be up with Ichiro in terms of infield hits/bunt hits every year, but he goes long periods without bunting. He has the skill to hit well over .300, just by slapping the ball to the left side, but he's stuck in the .270 range. He has the speed that should allow him to be a very good fielder, but he's careless with some of his plays in LF leading to errors, and he gets such bad jumps that it reduces the effectiveness of his speed (and he doesn't seem to be learning from his mistakes.) A few years ago he was in the 80 stolen base territory, now it seems he hardly tries, and when he does try, his technique goes to hell and he gets thrown out. He could be so much better than this.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 08:09 AM) It's a fair point, but I hate how it's taken this long for him to say something of such. His story has changed almost daily, and that's made it harder to not accept the tests' results. I'm afraid I don't see how this one is him "changing his story." Seems like he's just trying a new defense tactic, his line thus far has been he did not take anything, and this would fit with that. He hasn't gone from saying he didn't take anything to saying his buddy Miguel Tejada gave him a B-12 shot yet, that's what I call changing your story.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 08:37 AM) I'll take the under if they are left unchecked. Also, lets keep in mind other sources of nuclear materiel, i.e.: N. Korea. But here's the problem...if North Korea were to actually ship Iran a bomb or two, what exactly is there that we can do about it? We can't bomb the Hell out of Korea, because South Korea and Tokyo will cease to exist. We can't bomb Iran to tell them not to buy things from Korea, because all that us striking them will do is strengthen their government and give them even more reason to deal rapidly with the Koreans. And 2/3 of the U.S. army is currently not in any way, shape, or form ready for deployment, with a decent chunk of the rest tied up in Iraq.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 08:54 AM) i totally agree. also, for me, this is why israel has every justification to wipe hezbollah out, and they should continue what they are doing now. But the other side of that token is that it's not necessarily possible for Israel to do so. Their attacks have barely made a dent in that organization, they're still firing as many missiles into Israel as they were on day one of this campaign, the Israelis have been unable to push very far at all into Lebanon, and the added support gained by Hezbollah through this campaign, the damage its done to Lebanon's infrastructure, and the added prestige it has brought Hezbollah throughout the Muslim world is going to far offset the loss of a few hundred fighters.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 06:25 AM) I agree. There was a golden opportunity for the US and other powers here, and they chose not to take it. Probably, at least in the case of the US, because they realize that it would take years of commitment - beyond the current term of politicians. I am not sure why samclemens thought that "the left" in the US would be against a peacekeeping operation either - I think they would in fact support it. I doubt there's very many people who would actually oppose a genuine peacekeeping force in that area, I just don't think it's going to be feasible at all. Who out there actually has a few tens of thousand troops available to be sent into this area to actually fight against Hezbollah? And make no mistake, the only way a peacekeeping force is going to work is if it goes in to actually fight and forceably disarm that organization. I just don't see any way that anyone is going to do it, especially now that Hezbollah has been emboldened by the Israeli attack and has gained the full support of the Lebanese government.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 06:02 AM) So it comes back to the argument of Ethanol and Hybrid Engines again doesn't it. Ethanol of course still causes increases in the prices of petrol, so that ain't your solution. However, the next generation of Hybrids, from Honda and Toyota, due in roughly 08-09, should, if the rumors are correct, start to sate your appetite. Somewhere in the 80-110 mile per gallon range is the rumor.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 06:54 AM) you all can say with a straight face iran wont attack israel tomorrow for sure? that they wouldnt give terrorists nuclear weapons if they developed them (and no one knows how close they are)? Actually, while no one knows Exactly how close they are, plenty of people have very very good guesses, and all of those guesses say around 10 years.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 07:06 AM) Lieberman Confronts Anti-War Criticism This is an interesting article. According to this article, Lieberman is no longer getting completely killed at the polls, they say he is only down 54% to 41%. I know, thats a substantial margin, but its better than the last #s i saw, which had lieberman in the 30's. Unless you're seeing the internal polls, that 54-41 13 point Lamont lead was the worst poll for Joe that I've seen. The most recent Q-Poll, from this morning, is 51-45 in favor of Lamont. And that article you posted...well, the phrase "Fish in a barrel" comes to mind. Vs. 2005 and

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 09:44 PM) If the Sox really wanted to risk it, they could go with a Haeger or Phillips for a couple of starts, send B-Mac back down to AAA to let him start, or even keep him in the bullpen to let him keep doing what he's doing basically. The idea still has merit when you look at how Freddy has pitched lately. If you're considering bringing up a kid to spot-start...the one thing you really need to make sure you have in your bullpen is a long-man. So Mac doesn't move, IMO. And I can't think of anyone who really has any options left that we could spare, unless we're sending someone to the DL. You sending Jenks back down to make room for that starter? Maybe in September when the rosters expand...but at that point, either the season's over or the season's ungodly tight, and if the season is ungodly tight, do you want to throw in a guy making his 2nd ML start? Jerry Manuel and Neal Cotts have a few stories on how that worked out.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 09:40 PM) He may very well win, I am just pointing out that he is already a seasoned politician, skilled at the many levels of creative lying and selective memory. I guess you're right, if this campaign is any indication, Lieberman must not be a seasoned politician, because his whole campaign has been a disaster. Maybe I should be supporting him?

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 09:24 PM) Apples vs Oranges when talking 'supporters' vs 'staffers/volunteers'. The level of hate by the Bush supporters pales in comparison to almost anything you can find on DailyKos and HufPo. Now, if you have campaign volunteers stooping to the level of Hamsher, let me know. LOL, man, you never have wandered through FreeRepublic or LGF have you. And so we shouldn't support Lamont because he's a politican and Lieberman is not?

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 06:23 PM) That's spoken like someone who's political research comes exclusively from talk radio. There are literally hundreds of people who study this that would disagree with you. "I don't trust books. They're all fact, no heart." Seriously though, there's a motive for thought like that. Once a person decides that a priori American Military power can do anything, and is totally unstoppable in all fronts, and combines that with the belief that anyone who opposes America is pure evil (either with us or against us), then it makes sense to try to take every action done by Iran and use it as a reason for an immediate military strike, and then to belittle anyone who slows you down or asks for restraint. It's the exact formula that we used, say, 3.5 years ago.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 08:58 PM) How do you guys feel about giving B Mac a few starts and going with a 6 man rotation to take some of the burden off the starters' arms? Is it too late in the season? would the longer rest between starts screw them up even worse? Would it tinker too much with guys like Garland and Contreras who are throwing well? The worry with that plan right now is that, as others have pointed out, BMac is only stretched out to throw something like 60-70 pitches right now. So in other words, we'd be taking 1 pitcher out of our bullpen, and simultaneously, we'd wind up creating a game where our bullpen needs to throw 5-6 innings.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 06:25 PM) So candidates are suddenly responsible for what their supporters put on the internet? Man, some of the stuff Bush-supporters have posted...

QUOTE(Texsox @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 05:15 PM) From a slightly different angle, is it possible to disagree with Israel's actions and reactions and the strategy they are taking, and not be perceived as an anti-semite? In most corners it seems not. Even though there are citizens in Israel that disagree with the current path, anyone else will come off as a hater. See, this thread is a perfect illustration of the problem I have with this whole debate. Anyone who has any problem with what Israel is currently doing, either with their planning behind this offensive, or their methods of carrying it out, or any other act they've taken, is immediately labeled as part of the "Terrorist apologist crowd." Never mind that people could have honest differences of opinion over whether or not a particular tactic is either legal or effective, whether you get called an anti-semite or not, the immediate response to any questioning of the campaign, of any sort is "My God, why are you on Hezbollah's side?" Even when you criticize the actions of both sides, you get challenged as supporting terrorists.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 01:53 PM) Rivers will be a lot like Big Ben has the last couple years, feeding off his running game, o line, and defense IMO. That's very good, but not best in the league. I can't comment on Eli because I just hate that whiny little baby, and I'd be shocked if Delhomme, who has been incosistent his whole career, is good again in 2006. But you're forgetting how good the weapons are that Rivers can throw to. Hell, even last year Brees screwed himself over because he'd look away from LT on some routes out of the backfield. Between LT and Gates, Rivers has 2 damn good targets to throw to who can make things happen quite well for him. Eli...well, he has the guns, but his problem is missing them. He fixes that accuracy problem, and all of a sudden he'll look great, no matter how much he whines. The thing I keep thinking about is that there always seems to be 1-2 QB's who come out of nowhere every year to have great years, like Hasselbeck last year, for example. Or Kurt Warner, Jake Delhomme his first year, hell even Tom Brady. So, I'm just trying to think, aside from Peyton and Brady, who out there has the weapons and system around them to really come out and be dynamite.

Would anyone else not be surprised at all if Jake Daylight come and you gotta DelHomme had an absolutely dominant year? If Steve Smith stays healthy, they have a much better receiver opposite Smith this year in Johnson, and a fresh pair of legs in their running game. Philip Rivers and Eli Manning are 2 other guys who have a lot of questions but are in ideal situations to just come out and be awesome.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 01:47 PM) The offense has consistantly put up a lot of runs all season long. They had a bad 2 week stretch right after the allstar break and that was basically it. The offense has been outstanding this year. All I'm saying is that saying "The offense has been outstanding" doesn't mean it's impossible for the offense to be even more effective than it has been.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 01:45 PM) Or it could start putting up more runs consistently, instead of having our standard 12 run game followed by a 5 run game followed by a 3 run game. There's your key, and that's where I'd be going with this proposal. Yeah, it might cost us 1-2 runs out of every 30. But if it allowed us to space them out just a little bit better, by either setting us up better against left handers or setting us up so it's harder for other teams' bullpens to shut us down for an inning, I think it could turn into more wins.

QUOTE(GoRowand33 @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 01:34 PM) if the sox have any inkling of hope for the division this week they need to beat anaheim, take 2/3 from the yanks then sweep the tigers. no exceptions, otherwise I bet were going to be looking at the wildcard Best way to get the Tigers on a losing streak? Start it ourselves. It happened last year. So, we've got Buehrle against the Angels, Garcia, Garland, and Vazquez against the Yanks, and Contreras, Buehrle, and Garcia against the Tigers. Man, I wish Garcia wasn't the one pitching twice against those 2 teams.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 01:37 PM) Yup, the reason we've lost a lot of one run games has been because of the offense. So, here's the question...do we sit here and just keep repeating the "Blame the pitching staff" mantra, or do we actually accept the cards we've been dealt, and decide what the best way to play them is? Either the pitching staff will get better or it won't. The offense isn't going to decide that. All the offense can do is put up as many runs every game as possible. I think this would help, and sitting around saying "the pitching staff should be better" doesn't do anything to win us more games.

I think, at least at the beginning of the season, the best argument was that he is young, he has a stressful delivery, and his body is still growing/adding weight. You try to throw him for a lot of high-stress, starting innings early in his career, and he's probably more likely than Verlander to turn into Mark Prior. But yeah, his spot in the rotation next year should be unquestionned. And in 2-3 years, he'll have the top spot in that rotation. QUOTE(MarlinFan84 @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 01:30 PM) BTW I wasn't dogging any of your starters or their talents, just saying there is sometimes no use bringing them in while McCarthy doesn't get a chance. You want to make fast friends here? Start dogging Freddy Garcia.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 01:25 PM) We need to have our manager get a better grasp of the hook for the SP instead of just plain asking him, so how do you feel. Wouldn't have changed a thing today. Unless you wanted to give him the hook in the 4th inning.