Balta1701

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 06:59 PM) Well yeah, Indiana trumps Villanova if they are both going well. But Indiana isn't going well right now, and haven't been going well for 4 years. And while 4 years isn't all that long, it's enough time to fall way behind on the recruiting trail. Was Villanova doing that well before this coach got started there?

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 06:54 PM) And that's Davis' fault that he can't get players from the state. That can easily change again. Indiana can give a guy Wright more money, and if they're both going good, there's no denying Indiana trumps Nova in prestige. Heck, the way Sean May tells it, IU would have had him had Davis bothered to pay any attention at all to recruiting him and not just assumed he'd go to IU.

So is Duke back @ #1 next week?

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 01:45 PM) http://will.i.am/ Good ol knapweed. Man did that stuff cause us a bunch of annoyance @ field camp.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 05:41 PM) There are several simulated trophies in there, can'tcha see 'em???? And the 1907 and 1908 trophies turned to dust, that's why you can't see them either... Sadly, that wouldn't actually happen...unlike most metals, like Iron, which react with oxygen to give an oxide phase and energy, gold is actually stable at room conditions. For those who understand what it means, the free energy change of the reaction Au + x O = Au2O3 has a positive free energy of formation...which means you literally need to heat it in order to make it rust. This is why, for example, when gold is found in nature, it is actually found as metallic gold, and not found as an oxide, like aluminum which is found as Bauxite for example. Of course, they might have made the tropies back then out of Iron, at which point none of that would matter. But ours looked nice in gold.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 05:34 PM) Ummm, the Bulls essentially traded Brand for Chandler. What's wrong with that comparison? It was and still is a horrible trade. Chandler will never be the player that Brand currently is. Oh great, another Chandler debate. And it's starting to move quicker again. Look, he's starting to turn into a decent player. He's certainly not the best in the league, he's certainly not an all-star. He has only played a few months with this new contract, and only a few weeks where he's been healthy and finally in shape. He's had a disappointing season to be sure. No one right now can tell me they know 100% where his potential ceiling is, and no one can tell me 100% that they know whether or not he'll actually reach it. If we wanted to win now, Brand pulling in 25 and 10 a night would clearly be better than Chandler. You'd have to be crazy to doubt that. Down the road? We'll see. Chandler would have his work cut out for him to improve enough to match that. Anywho, the guy who made that deal is a scout for the Yankees now or something like that, so who cares at this point? We've got him, he's not terrible, let's try to figure out the best thing we can do with him. If that's trade him, tell me. If we can build around him by getting another big guy, let's figure that out too. Aside from learning from whatever mistakes were made by he who won't be named, which I think Pax has done well (I.e. the drafting of Hinrich, Deng), there's little debate left at this point. The Clippers won't give us a redo on that deal, so let's just try to figure out the best thing we can do with what we have. Think Tyson should be benched? Traded? Play 48 minutes a game? Tell me why. But this back and forth "He sucks, no he's great" isn't getting us anywhere.

Hehe, turns out Cheney was hunting illegally. He will be issued a warning citation. (Carries no fine or penalty). But I can still taunt!

QUOTE(chitownsportsfan @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 03:23 PM) Wow, that is quite the statement. I find it much too optimisic though. I suppose 105 could happen--if everyone on the team outperforms the most optimistic predictions and no injuries occur outside of the occasional hamstring pull. However, the chance of that happening is probably less than .1 percent, which doesn't really even make it worth considering in my mind. If this team played 100 seasons I think they would win 105 about once. The statement was "If everything goes well". That removes a lot of the bad things when you make that assumption. That means you're assuming Crede doens't regress due to his back, Thome has a Thome-like year, our bullpen holds together, and our starting pitching doesn't backtrack. Assuming everything goes well automatically excludes things like Thome, Konerko, or Buehrle spending significant time on the DL, hitting .220, etc.

Anyone else pumped that Crede still has the same haircut?

I walked past a person wearing a Cubs hat yesterday and biked past a person in a Twinkies hat about 40 minutes ago. Both times I just smiled.

QUOTE(DonkeyKongerko @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 01:51 PM) I thought maybe there was some connection between Church's Chicken and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Instead, it turns out Church's Chicken (and Caribou Coffee) is owned by Arcapita, formerly known as the First Islamic Investment Bank. I didn't even know there were still Church's Chickens around, I haven't seen one in at least 10 years. There are a bunch of them out here. A bunch more downtown.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 12:46 PM) Yes, I suppose it could, should that information linkage be made, etc. Definitely should be taken seriously. This, like the leak of her name itself, should be investigated, and anyone who is guilty of leaking said information should be punished severely. With the Plame leak, it took several months before the DOJ began an investigation...the CIA had to request it, and then the DOJ sat on the request for a while before finally starting it up when Ashcroft recused himself. So what you'd expect with this sort of leak would be a CIA request to Justice for an investigation. That'd be your first sign that the CIA believes harm was actually done. For all we know this is being leaked deliberately by the CIA to try to limit some of the damage done by the Plame leak (disinformation, if you will.)

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 01:32 PM) You mean Astros? A jersey that says "Bush"? Get it? Eh? Eh?

For some reason the bloody video is refusing to play on my computer (realplayer) right now, but C-SPAN has a link up which supposedly runs to the video at that page. Under "Recent programs", "President Bush Remarks to the 2005 World Series Champions (02/13/2006)"

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 01:10 PM) The image of Dubya holding up a White Sox jersey with the name Bush on the back of it just made half the people on this board puke, the other half starched their shorts. And a bunch of Houston Texans fans jealous.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 12:39 PM) It already has, and Mr. Libby is going to pay for his mistake. Others may as well. As far as this particular leak, fortunately, I see nothing in the article of any substance that Iran wouldn't already know we are doing. But that leak should also be investigated, as soon as the Plame leak investigation and prosecution is complete. Actually...this one, if true, could potentially prove some serious harm. It's entirely possible that, had she personally not traveled to a country in recent years, the leak of her name itself might not have done as much damage as it could have done. She'd mainly been in the U.S. for several years from what's been reported elsewhere, doing work on WMD's. If 1 specific country knew that her work was focused on them, it could expose more undercover operations which could have been designed to mislead that country. Probably not nearly as damaging as the leak of her name itself, which would have immediately exposed every one she had ever met or done business with, but the name of her main focus could expose more specific actions she'd taken, like specific phone calls or people she'd been in contact with through other means.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 09:53 AM) Apparently during today's Big Ten teleconference, Davis made some pretty telling statements. He's basically accpeting the end's near for him at Bloomington. He was saying something to the effect that we need one of our own, someone that has played at IU that can be embraced to become coach. I knew it wouldn't be long before Dane Fife got promoted. I would have put that in green...but I wouldn't be terrifically surprised if it happened.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 09:38 AM) Brand is the man. One of the worst trades we ever made. I think that trade epitomized the last few years of our previous GM, who's name will not be spoken here so as to avoid further cursing. In fact, that trade and that draft say a lot about his work. When people criticize Pax for things like Drafting Gordon, I sometimes just sit here and think "Gordon, Deng, and Hinrich, or Curry, Chandler, and Fizer." Jay Williams wasn't exactly his fault, and Brand was a good but obvious pick, but man we missed some chances with those picks and trades.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 09:27 AM) Good call on that, I didnt even think of it. I would have guessed Commcast would be airing it, or maybe even ESPNEWS..... If memory serves usually ESPNews and SC will run a brief highlight clip. I'm hoping CSpan or their website broadcast it.

Anyone know what time the meeting is supposed to be @? I'm sure one of the C-Spans will broadcast it.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 09:06 AM) Would you consider all of those players beasts as well? Well, they probably should put up better than 3 points and 10 rebounds in 30+ minutes to be considered a beast, so you're right on that. Just don't take away from how well Brand has really been playing this year. Man it'd be nice to somehow have him in the middle with Chandler.

Bush nominates totally unqualified man to serve as one of the 7 Federal Reserve governors...guy doesn't have any sort of Ph.D. in economics, but has strong Republican connections and has served directly in this administration. Economists unhappy about the choice, White House not allowing the guy to give interviews while his nomination is up. Usual day I guess. Supposedly, when that nomination goes through, Bush will have appointed all 7 members of the Fed. Governors, and 3 of them will have actively served in his administration, possibly for the first time ever, and definately for the first time in recent memory according to bloomberg.

I've been wearing shorts for 2 weeks. It's been constantly 70s-80s.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 07:16 AM) Honestly. That's just ridiculous. I think its impossible to rate presidencies less than forty years old. I think we're just now finally seeing a full and honest picture of LBJ's years and JFK's years. And even though Nixon would have been impeached and probably convicted of it, it's too early to call him a bottom five president. Same with Carter - despite his screwups as well. And we may find that some of his policies may have ended up being solutions to current problems. As much credit as people gave Reagan, some of the policies he followed led to some serious problems in the 1990's and today. The same for Clinton on either side. While I won't argue that there's potential for our current President to fall on either side of the spectrum according to the side you're on, he sure as hell isn't there yet. And we won't fully know for decades. Actually, I would say that we probably know enough about Nixon at this point to consider him a bottom 5 president, now that we've learned more about his wiretappings, his disasterous efforts to prolong the Vietnam war in an effort to find some sort of "Victory", his dealings with the economy which helped build into the inflation mess that helped bring down Carter, etc. Now that he's dead, his full life story is at least written, and can be judged. On the other hand, it's probably too early to judge the Carter admin yet. First of all he's still alive, but secondly we are still seeing some of the end results of his administration, such as with Iran or the modern energy crisis. 5 years ago you'd have said Carter screwed up royally calling for more renewable energy and things like that, but now we're hearing even Bush forced to say in Public things that Carter was saying in the 70's. Carter's story still isn't complete, nor is Reagans or anyone after him. Nixon, we're starting to get a good idea of the results of his years. But not Carter.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 07:10 AM) You're right. It's the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. I read the article wrong - it said that Abramoff had previously claimed an invitation to Crawford. However the article did say there was no more than two dozen people there when that picture was taken. He claims he was invited to Crawford but couldn't attend that one. Supposedly he also has some sort of invitation to prove it. Also 1 more thing to note...this is supposedly just the tip of the iceberg in pictures. I pointed this one out, despite all of it's shortcomings, because it is the first direct evidence that the WH is covering something up in this case. Back a month ago or so, I was reluctant to say the WH was not fully disclosing everything because there was no evidence of it. Now we have multiple witnesses saying the WH isn't telling the truth, and we're starting to gradually see hard evidence. That's a new development.