mmmmmbeeer

Welcome aboard!!! I think you'll find this site to be MUCH more informative than that troll infested MLB board.

I mean hell, Clinton even took out the aspirin factory that supplied Bin Laden with his aspirin. I'll be ya everytime Bin Laden has a migraine he cusses Bill Clinton and his strong stance on defense. Rumor has it that the aspirins were being laced with, gulp, ibuprofen. Thank God that factory was taken out in such a prompt and effective manner or the world may be overrun by WMDs and Sudanese aspirins. Incidentally, Clinton's orders for cruise missiles to be lobbed at Iraq had more to do with covering up his perjury than it did national security. But for some reason I doubt we'll agree on that.

They're free to kill Bush but it would be an assassination. The UN has every right to condemn the assassination of GWB being he is a head of state and a government official. The point of my post was that this should not be looked upon as an assassination according to international policy. Yassin was NOT a head of state and belonged to a terrorist organization with absolutely no affiliation to a RECOGNIZED government.

I believe international law prohibits the assassination of government officials. Yassin was the "spiritual" leader of a terrorist organization with absolutely no government affiliation. He is therefore exempt from becoming an "assassination" victim. Was he murdered in cold blood? Certainly. I don't think the UN should be condemning nations for the murder of terrorists, quadripalegic or not.

You mean the Bill Gates who donates billions to charities on top of the millions (perhaps billions) he donates to the federal government in the form of taxes??? Yeah, he is one evil son of a b****.

I love the latest release from the White House PR department showing the happiness and jolliness of war. You know, that one where those 6 marines were shot at, one got his head blown off, but the other 5 took out 20 Iraqis then celebrated singing happy and joyous songs. I'll tell ya, I didn't think it was possible, but Karl Rove has just done an amazing job at making this look like a happy war. For a man that 99% of the time comes across as clear, concise, and intelligent, that was just really a stupid comment CW.

It's sad that you even had to explain that. I'm astounded by the number of people who have absolutely no problem throwing their money away to our federal government. Can you imagine how quick any private business would go under if they were managed like any government funded program??? Newt Gingrich....oh to have him and his contract with America back.

I just hope you aren't referring to France or Russia as "allies" who didn't support us. Although not fully investigated at this point in time, there is credible evidence that both France and Russia had their hands in Saddam's deep pockets in exchange for UN vetos. IIRC, there wasn't a single country who declared that the WMDs weren't in Iraq, the majority of resistance were from countries hoping for peaceful inspections that would result in the disarmament of Iraq as opposed to an invasion. I'm not trying to defend the administration, I believe we were led to war under false pretenses brought about by hyped up charges from the administration and faulty international intelligence. I am to this day convinced that there are certainly WMDs buried somewhere or they made their way to Syria. I didn't feel that Iraq was an imminent threat but at the time, with the evidence presented, felt that pre-emptive action was just and necessary.

Defense spending is currently at 6% of GDP, which historically speaking, is not even close to a high percentage. To the original poster, the problem with the Bush tax cut isn't the cut itself but the irresponsible spending (non-discretionary) that this congress and administration have pushed through. Prescription drug plans are great ideas in countries who are socialist democracies, where tax rates are well over 50% for the majority of the population, but not in a purer capitalist system where taxes are necessarily kept moderate to low to promote investment, business, and spending. For whatever reason Bush and co. decided to pander to the left and have been spending more than Clinton ever did. Also, with the economy struggling the last couple of years, taxable incomes dropped, which means less income for the government. Clinton had a much easier time balancing the budget not because of high taxes, but rather the enormous tax incomes flooding the government coffers. Tax breaks should never be frowned upon. I don't know about you, but I'd like to think I can be more productive with my money than a bloated federal government. The more money I have in my pocket, the better off I am.

I didn't find the joke to be in bad taste. The world community believed there were WMDs in Iraq. The left loves to remind us how we were the ones that gave Saddam the weapons and yet these same people claim to have known that there were no WMDs in Iraq last year??? What happened to them??? I don't get it. Anyway, I believe the humor wasn't intended to imply that Bush knew that there were never WMDs, but rather display a puzzled Bush looking for something that he was convinced was there (keys under the couch, whatever).

Bravo. :fthecubs

Good article. I really like the sidebar thing about the steroids. Sounds like one hell of an argument that makes a lot of sense when reading his quotes.

Decreased taxes???

Sounds great 56789. I didn't mean to throw a wrench in everything man, it's just that I've learned from experience. Most recently my football draft went bad when I drafted Michael Vick before he was hurt due to an extremely early draft. That selection burned me the ENTIRE season.

I think the key to every bit of optimism on this team is the fact that Jerry Manuel is gone. As casual (well, maybe more than casual) fans watching the games on TV or from the seats at the park we were able to pick apart JM's management of this team. I can only imagine how frustrating it must have been to be a professional on the field being led by that dips***. Couldn't agree more though, there certainly seems to be a positive vibe coming out of camp so far.

Ya think? It seems that in the past JR will pay for perceived quality. So you think they would've dumped like a Koch and Konerko, replace them with bottom of the barrel players, just to keep Colon? I don't know man, I think I buy into the theory that the money was there ONLY for Colon, once he left it was off the table.

I just found this thread, so sorry for the duplicity between this and my post on Yahoo..... March 1st seems REALLY early for a draft. I mean the Sox first exhibition game isn't until Mar 4th. I think it's important to push it back because of spring injuries and also to get a feel about some guys coming back from injury. Examples would be Koch and Kong. See who's hot in ST and who's cold. All this should have a bearing on the later rounds in the draft. I think that the first draft date/time was perfect, if not too early. Mar 1st just seems ridiculous. I'll be there if that's the popular concensus though.

People who say "supposively" instead of "supposedly". Complete strangers starting conversations while waiting in line at a store or whatever. White guys who homey themselves out People who key cars 3 lane highway and all 3 cars are going the same speed, side-by-side-by-side Paying a "delivery charge" on a pizza dance clubs and those who are inside (alright, everyone except for the hotties) stinky people

That's where I disagree. I think that 2003 we had the right components on the field. The moves were made, especially at the trade deadline, to have a winner. If there were ever a white sox team that should've caught lightning in a bottle, that was the team. I don't know about you, but while watching the Sox play the way they did that month and a half after the ASB last season I thought they were BY FAR the best team in baseball at that point. They choked. The only move that wasn't made last season was to fire JM in May or June.

Two things.... 1.) Do you think this Maddux deal was an under-the-table part of the ARod deal? 2.) Even if the Yankees do fall flat on their faces this season they still have a couple more seasons with this lineup. I mean everyone they've signed, with the possible exception of Lofton and Gordon, signed a multi-year deal. I mean they're setting up like a 3 year run here.

That's from 3am this morning. Sounds like things have changed since then.

I don't know if I'd go with any of those guys as keepers. None of them are irreplaceable, IMO. Colon wouldn't be a bad keeper, but I'd shy away from keeping pitchers unless it's a fantasy ace, the likes of a Prior, Schilling, Schmidt, or Gagne. Go out and find some guys that have the best chance of having decent to good years and are still young. Guys like Cabrera out of Florida, Maeur out of Minny, Blalock or Texeira from TEX, Aubrey Huff or Baldelli from TB, Podesnik from MIL, you get the idea..... guys that you can go and pick up, some of them perhaps not even drafted, who will be superstars in the next couple of years. Those are the guys I'd be looking to keep. I'd take Cabrera and Huff on my team for 2005 before I'd take Colon and Frank. Gotta look at the upside and future man, not just this season. BTW, Buerhle is an awful fantasy pitcher, IMO. I'd see if you have anyone in your league that will buy into his name and trade them for another weak position of yours. Then go pick up a bombass middle reliever, like a Lidge or Soriano, that will get you 10-15 wins but with higher K totals, lower WHIP and ERA. Usually those middle relievers are available in every league unless you are using holds as a stat.

How the hell do the Twins keep on getting picked for a 1st place finish? It's not like they ran away with the division last season, they went on a tear the 2nd half. They've lost some important components of their team. I'm not saying that we should be picked for first, but the Twins??? KC would be a better choice than MIN, IMHO. Oh, and another thing, I agree that we need to have an impressive couple of months to start off the season, but our first month looks like it may be a real b****.

1. Red Sox 2. Houston 3. Yankees 4. sCrUBS 5. Angels 6. Phillies 7. Mariners 8. A's 9. Giants 10. Orioles 11. Blue Jays 12. Cardinals 13. Marlins 14. Royals 15. White Sox 16. Braves 17. Diamondbacks 18. Twins 19. Dodgers 20. Rangers 21. Indians 22. Reds 23. Padres 24. Devil Rays 25. Mets 26. Rockies 27. Expos 28. Pirates 29. Tigers 30. Brewers ALE--Boston ALC--Chicago ALW--Anaheim WC--NYY NLE--Philly NLC--Houston NLW--SanFran WC--Chicago WS--Boston over Houston The rankings are based on potential 2004 records and have absolutely nothing to do with last year's records.

Mad Season is the shiznit my friend. Your list indicates you like AIC too. So...I don't know if you were aware of this, but this is by far the BEST live DVD/VHS I own. I mean seriously, you have to buy this. .. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...=video&n=507846 Go click the link, order it, and next weekend sit down with some reebs, or whatever suits your fancy, and jam out man. You'll thank me later.