Balta1701

There are a great many Democrats who supported the war, or still support the war, and who are not going to face primary challenges. Joe Lieberman is not just a pro-war Democrat, in many cases, he is the pro-Bush Democrat. When Fox News needs a Democrat to go on and attack other Democrats, who is the first person they call? He makes it vastly more difficult to actually build a coalition and come up with these "plans" to make everything better that the right wing claims we don't have. Take a look at some of these numbers: There are many more Conservative Democrats than Lieberman in the senate, and they aren't facing the same revolt that he is. He is facing that possible revolt because in his state, his ratings among Republicans are vastly higher than his ratings above Democrats in most polls. He is facing a potential challenge because he helps the Republicans market their ideas and hurts the Democrats. He is facing a challenge because every time the Bush Administration decides to put up a solid, unified front on a major issue, he winds up splitting the opinion of the Democrats and making it impossible to present a unified message. I've voted for Democrats who voted for the war, and I'm going to do that again. But that doesn't mean I have to tolerate other Democrats who actively work in public to weaken the principles I'm trying to elect people to uphold.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 09:20 PM) They are incapable of proposing sensible alternatives to Republican legislation so they are reduced to stomping up and down and crying like a bunch of spoiled little toddlers who didn't get a candy bar they wanted. f*** them. As long as they want to act like they are acting then they deserve to lose. As long as they are the hypocritical assholes that they are they deserve to lose. As long as they choose to whine and cry about how evil Bush is and resorting to character assassination instead of a reasoned and logical argument then not only do they deserve to lose but they deserve to have it rubbed in their faces at every opportunity. "Hey...you remember the other day when I asked you what the definition of Irony was and you said -AAHHHHHH"

QUOTE(maggsmaggs @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 05:57 PM) good move if he is a minor leaguer/part time reserve. Willie Harris is not a starting major leaguer. When you have Manny and Ortiz on your team...you can probably manage to get by with a few people who don't deserve starting roles on a major league team, and it probably won't hurt you too much.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 05:50 PM) He's not a pitcher... Yet...

MSNBC's hosts, making fun of those dirty, dirty gay people. Edit: And on the same Day, Matthews: Bin laden sounds like Michael Moore.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 05:18 PM) LMAO @ the clientele comment. I'm shocked that Ameriquest is the parent yet so many got laid off. I don't kow much about them, but from what I do they seemed to be pretty solid. How long did you work for them (and I apologize because I think I recall you posting about getting laid off, but my brain is so fried from the past month I can't think straight...) and were they cool at separation time? Well, Ameriquest is currently facing some pretty hefty legal problems...to the tune of a $325 million settlement with 33 states over a bunch of things, like getting people to refinance right after they were sold a first mortgage (pay closing costs twice) or only giving people high-rate mortgages despite the fact that they'd qualify for better ones. Oh yeah...there's a piece of advice...probably want to stay away from Ameriquest if you're looking for a mortgage (no offense to those who work there)

QUOTE(Mplssoxfan @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 05:19 PM) Wish me luck! I'm walking for a diabetes cure at the ungodly hour of 8AM this Saturday. Break a leg! (Wait a second, is that for acting or walking?)

QUOTE(Mplssoxfan @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 05:16 PM) Just what makes Chirac think that NUKE will do his dirty work for him? Clearly...those responsible will be on the 25 man roster of the Indians...

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 05:07 PM) If Willie Harris is the starting CF for the Wrong Sox, then Manny should start working on cutting the ball off from the center fielder again. Is his arm actually worse than Damon's? That's hard to do.

I doubt there's a fan in basketball who would complain about a guy on their side receiving one of those fines. Hell, if Pax asked all of the Bulls season ticket holders to put up $1 to cover it, Ib et they would.

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 02:43 PM) Which 900 Americans were polled? It seems like a low number to me to choose to represent the entire country. This is not a good thing to base your argument on at all. Actually, given statistics, that's a pretty decent sample size, should get a margin of error of +/- 4% at the 95% confidence level, +/- 1-2% at the 1 sigma 68 % confidence level. Once you get above like 500 you start getting samples that are representative, and just adding people won't change much. Most places do about 11-1200 because it gets the 95% CL down to about 3%. Edit: Oh, and on the poll people are pointing at there...note that the particular poll is not actually asking about the program in question. It asks if they should be allowed to obtain warrantless searches against terror suspects. First of all, that is almost a push-poll question, because it implies that the people being surveilled are guaranteed to be terror suspects. But even more importantly, it doesn't specificy whether or not they are U.S. citizens or not.

Hey, it's been almost 2 years since my left knee did that!

I'd love to see T.O.'s reaction when Grossman goes down and Orton has to come in to throw to him.

T.O. later accused Angelo of leaving the meeting early, saying that Angelo was "dry heaving" as the time ticked down towards the arrival of the desert course.

QUOTE(Chisoxrd5 @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 11:07 AM) Naturally...he followed the well-known, "power hitting first basemen style of fan letter writing format." It's a common practice. As long as he hits 40+ home runs and drives in 100+ runs next year, he could have had a bunch of trained monkeys write it for all I care. "It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times"

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 11:03 AM) My wife and I do. We are barely over our incomes added up. I take it that's possible when you're in Mich City (that's where you're at correct?) but somehow I doubt that people living closer to the city, or for another example anywhere in the state of California, are following those guidelines.

LAT

Man, every day Google makes me happier and happier I use them to search. At least they're planning on putting up a fight.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 05:34 AM) No one is making excuses for the secondary we are simply talking about people complaining about not getting enough pressure on the QB. And to be fair 2 TD's were from a guy slipping which led to a wide open Steve Smith. But both times a guy slipped...Smith was wide open, and not single-covered. When you have a receiver that good, there should be at least help in the neighborhood in case someone does slip or wind up out of position. Both times that someone slipped there was no help in the area.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 09:50 AM) If this turns out to be Bin Laden (sounds like the quality isn't the best so they aren't quite positive it is him yet) it is really interesting that it has taken him 13 months to release just a crappy audio broadcast of his message. He hasn't been able to stand on video for almost 2 years now, so I wonder what that means exactly. Is the guy that afraid of getting caught that he can't even rally the troops anymore? Is he that isolated that he doesn't have the ability to get the equiptment and/or the means to safely get a tape to someone important for broadcasting? My guess is that the best explanation is that he's significantly changed his appearance in a way to try to avoid being seen by the U.S. (Shave and a haircut?). A year or two ago I would have believed more that the reason he's not showing up on video is that his health is a concern and he doesn't look as strong as he did in late 01, but it's been about 3 years since we last saw a ton of videos of him, and if his health was a genuine concern, I just can't see him still being alive. Not constantly on the run, unable to visit a trained western doctor, in remote areas of Pakistan.

QUOTE(mreye @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 09:39 AM) I love CNN: Not clear? Not clear? How about linking to the article that says Pakistan is reporting: "Strike may have killed Al Qaeda expert." Not clear = Strike "May" have, and source only being random people within Pakistan. It'd clearly be a good thing if we got the guys we reportedly got, but thus far the only sources I've seen say that they only have unnamed Pakistanis as sources. At some point, you can't say things are certain until you have someone willing to put their name and credibility on the line about the report.

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 09:44 AM) They're going for it again in 2006. If Contreras is stellar, why would you want to trade him mid-season unless there is some unforeseen gaping hole at that time? Yes, you want to build a perennial contender, but, at the expense of success in 2006, a year in which we are built to defend our World Championship? Count me out. Now that we've gotten 1...if I felt like it gave us a better chance to win the W.S. in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, etc., yes, I would be willing to sacrifice 1 pitcher in 2006. We will still be a contender if we do trade him, and whether or not we win 120+ games would then depend on how well everyone holds up. But if we got a couple more young pieces, of any sort, to stick into our lineup in 07-08, that makes the rest of our players (read: Mark Buehrle) more affordable, and makes us better for the long term. Long-term gains weren't worth sacrificing winning the first one. That I can understand. But I could understand how long-term gains could be worth waiting 1 year for improvement.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 09:32 AM) If the right offer comes around...I'd trade him. If we don't have any needs...then keep him. I still don't like the idea of having as valuable of a chip as him and letting him walk with us getting absolutely nothing in return, given that we want to build a franchise that can win for a long time here.

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Jan 18, 2006 -> 04:56 PM) I agree 100%. It is hard to see anyone having a significant drop-off. People always said that it would be hard to repeat by winning all those one run games again, but with the new lineup I don't think the Sox will be in as many as last year. If the offense scores more, that will also take the pressure off the pitchers, which is always a good thing, especially for someone like Vazquez. You take all that into consideration, then you throw the postseason experience into the equation and they are a pretty tough group to match up with. If Anderson can match Rowand's numbers from 2005: 13 HR, 69 RBI, and .270 AVG, .329 OBP, .407 SLG, .736 OPS, and have a lower K total (Rowand 116 in 578 AB), the Sox are going to be looking really good across the board. I would go even farther than that and say that it seems nearly impossible to expect a significant drop-off offensively...for the simple reason that some of our guys' performances last year were so far down from where they should have been that if they fall any farther...then suddenly we'll Pablo, Machowiak, the Widge, or maybe even Borchard getting more playing time. If Crede falls below hitting .240...it's not that hard to find someone who'll perform better. Ditto Uribe. Ditto Anderson. If our guys on the bench don't wind up working out either for some reason, then it's also not going to be that hard to peel off some old, veteran infielder or something like that from a team like the Royals or someone who has fallen completely out of the race. We didn't exactly give up a ton for Blum, and there's no reason we won't be able to find a backup somewhere who could hit .250 for us if given regular playing time.

So...talks with Contreras have dried up. In other words, he'll either sign by Monday or be traded by then.