Jimmy

I am critical of all of it. What makes you think Obama knows what he is talking about?

But you also must concede that Obama sounds terrible when he doesnt have prepared words right in front of his face. Almost like a kid whos asked to read his book report but he never read the book and has to make it up as they go in a painfully forced manner. That is what Obama sounds like when speaking on the fly. You're talking about the way Obama stammers? So he isn't elequant when speaking off the cuff. I think that has more to do with the fact that he doesn't want to have a gaffe that politicians tend to have that can cost him the election. The "bitter" comment almost did. At least Obama actually knows what he is talking about though. I'm still waiting for an example of an incoherent rambling non-answer to a question from Obama. This women is plain dumb and has no clue what she is talking about. Another part of Couric's interview: she was asked to name one SCOTUS opinion besides Roe v. Wade. She sat there silently. But hey, she is qualified as an insurance policy to one day name justices to that same court. Palin is not dumb, so put that thought in your back pocket. She graduated from one of the better public universities(Idaho, shockingly, is on par with UNC and Illinois-go figure). So what if it is a journalism degree. As far as Obama knowing what he is talking about, politically, you have to wonder. He has about equal experience to Palin, and like her his only experience is at the state level(I know hes a US Senator, but hes really done nothing since he came to Washington). And his time as a state senator was nothing to write home about. Add that to the fact that Obama himself is a product of the most corrupt government in United States history, the Illinois Democratic Party, and he either changes his mind or doesnt vote at all on nearly every issue, he is not an appealing candidate. In fact, probably the least qualified major ticket presidential candidate ever.

But you also must concede that Obama sounds terrible when he doesnt have prepared words right in front of his face. Almost like a kid whos asked to read his book report but he never read the book and has to make it up as they go in a painfully forced manner. That is what Obama sounds like when speaking on the fly.

What do people have against John Raynor?

For all the flack that McCain gets about the Palin pick, Biden has been just as big as if not a bigger embarrassment as a VP pick for the democrats. The guy is a joke.

I predict we will see him suiting up for the Long Island Ducks as his next stop.

And another former poster, who told me about this site, is reaching for a celebratory beer. To each his own.

He might catch on somewhere, he might not. Teams need arms and they usually dont care about their talent level, so thats a plus for him. I wouldn't be shocked to see him end up in the indy leagues though.

If Hermida isnt back that will make me sick.

Actually in the last 5 years we have won a world series, the 2nd...I consider those two to be the franchise water marks. Beating the Mutts is just gravy.

how the f*** could ANYONE be a palin supporter? give me one reason. this is the stupidest sh*t i've ever heard. I ask the same about Obama, although I support neither. Yes, but at the very least, Obama appears to understand the world and the country far more than she does. Considering Obama's intent to get closer to Israel and prolong the war(s) I would have to disagree with this.

Am I the only person who doesn't hate Jacobs??? Yeah, he was unsatisfactory defensively and he struck out a ton but its not like he was the worst 1st baseman in the MLB. He did add to our offense and is second on our team with RBI's. He doesn't even lead our team with strikeouts, which everyone complains about. He doesn't lead our team with errors either... just wondering why everyone seems to hate Jacobs? You know in some ways I totally agree with u. He provides a lot of homers and has over 90 rbi this season. I think basically it comes down to the fact that he is due to get paid possibly in the region of $3-4m next season, a figure that the team feels is not worth it considering there is certainly a few viable and cheaper options ready to take his place, eg Gaby Sanchez. Not to mention that their is a surplus of available talent in the market who can play better D and hold their own on offense for the 2-3 million dollar range in case Gaby Is not ready, which I doubt he isn't. Sanchez is nothing but a stop gap himself.

how the f*** could ANYONE be a palin supporter? give me one reason. this is the stupidest sh*t i've ever heard. I ask the same about Obama, although I support neither.

Have you ever watched a game where actual managing, in game, is involved with Joe Torre? He is lost-as his abysmal record away from the Yankees(and with the Yankees, in NL parks with NL rules) clearly illustrates. He earned the nickname "Clueless Joe" for a reason.

He would make an american league team like the Rays VERY happy next year No he wouldn't. Carlos Pena is A LOT better. He might be better than Jacobs but Pena is still garbage. I would hope that the Rays wanted a better option than Pena, just like I would hope that theyd want a better option than Jacobs.

I personally think the Dodgers should of ran away with this division, but that wasn't likely to happen with Torre-whos an awful manager-at the helm. It is very surprising they even competed with him leading the team.

She's an idiot and doesn't know what the hell she believes. She's no Ron Paul. Given some of Bidens recent comments I'd say shes the smarter of the two VP candidates. Smart enough not to routinely sound stupid at least.

No kidding. The next president is either going to be a failure (or victim of circumstances) or is going to be a great president. I don't think we'll have anything in between. I personally think both candidates will be epic failures, and would have been regardless of the political climate during their term. They are just awful choices for leader of the free world.

Tucker also had an ERA over 8, and if anybody is going to be called up out of the pitchers, it would be West and Fielder brings a lot of Drama to the clubhouse, i would rather have Cantu at first and Dallas at 3rd or Cantu at 3rd and Sanchez at 1st than getting rid of JJ West doesn't even come close to Glen's or Tucker's stats, so he wouldn't be called up. If you want to have Dallas or Gaby, fine, but I would take a proven player who is a great hitter. You could still always use Gaby or Dallas as a backup for the time being. Time being? Neither one is better than being a backup. That said, Dallas McPhereson is not a prospect and its very doubtful he has much trade value. Same for Gaby but for other reasons, guys who can only play first base but have no power generally dont gain much interest.

I think we saw a clear difference in the style of the candidates. McCain was constantly lecturing Obama, while Obama returned that by praising McCain when the opportunity arose. McCain was condescending while Obama was very polite, even in disagreement. He came off a lot more presidential. I have to say I was getting really tired of McCain mentioning Reagan (shiver). One thing I had hoped that Obama would do was to ask McCain why he voted against the GI Bill. I would have been very interested to see what McCain's response to that would have been. There was no difference neither man is capable of leading this country and changing the toxic environment in Washington DC. Concur, but when I answer the question "who won the debate", to me I can separate policy from politics, if that makes sense. I don't disagree with either's policy stances but Obama, in my opinion, clearly came off as the better politician and I think he will win votes because of how he performed tonight. Obama did a great job of painting McCain as Bush 2 and McCain didn't do much to show himself as the strong, independent maverick that he needs to be/is trying to paint himself as. I honestly believe this debate accomplished nothing . To people who have a grasp on the issues and care about them, of course you're right, but when talking about the American public and voting it's all about marketing and how you can influence the people of the country to vote for you. GWB somehow was able to paint himself as the normal every day guy you could have a beer with and a small government conservative who ran a "humble foreign policy" platform. So yea...the voting public needs to be tricked, not given actual solutions about issues. Before 9/11 thats exactly what Bush's foreign policy was. As far as Bush himself goes, anyone whos ever met the guy attests that he actually is the normal everyday guy you could have a beer with. Everything you read about Bush basically paints him as a genuinely good person. My stance has always been that very little, if any, foreign policy that has come about since 9/11 is George W. Bush's. He has surrounded himself with powerful people, with alot of influence, who are direct products of the old guard. People with deep roots in the intelligence community, and likely some of the paranoia that comes with such a position. Their major problem is they tried to use their mid 20th century ideology based on communist containment in a 21st century battlefield, against an indiscernible enemy. Bush didn't go into office wanting to turn the United States into the world's police force and if you believe otherwise you are a fool. He had the wrong people feeding him ideas, methods, and solutions at the absolute worst time. Do I think he is a great president? No, but that is not a question that can be answered for a long time. I don't think he chose his closest advisors well. Had he done better at that, I think a drastically different response in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks would of happened. I am not really concerned with who wins the election, as both candidates are awful choices for a number of different reasons. McCain is bred from that same old guard mentality, Obama has essentially no experience. Palin is equally inexperienced, Biden is-for lack of a better term-an idiot. McCain has trouble getting people interested-espousing leadership if you will, the only change Obama has ever taken part in-judging by voting record-is changing his mind(or not voting at all-its either status quo or he dont know! McCain should use those last two phrases, but like Colbert, I have already copyrighted them. Give me a call Senator McCain, we will talk usage fees). I am so sick of this party bickering. Neither side is right and for the most part both sides get it terribly wrong the majority of the time. The current state of American capitalism is no better than the communism we fought so hard to destroy. Both parties spend all of their time fighting against each other or doing whatever they can to line their own pockets, working against the American people they have sworn to represent. We basically have a quirky one party system, where even great ideas will get sent packing just because the other side came up with it. I think of all people who adhere to a one party philosophy as uneducated sheep. Just because it says Republican or Democrat by their name doesn't mean they are a good candidate. But people still blindly follow them, probably not even knowing the candidates actual platform or what he has done before in their political career. A staunch democrat could have everything in common ideologically with a republican and vehemently disagree with everything the democratic candidate stands for but they will vote for him because he is a democrat-and vice versa. All they see is an elephant or a donkey. It is ruining this nation, and quite frankly it is pathetic.

I welcome socialism, comrades. If we turn communist, THEN you can say 'comrades'. Until then, learn the difference between socialism and communism. Thanks. :thumbup I know the difference. Maybe you should learn a little about me. Thanks. :thumbup Maybe a little history as well. Russian communism was a bastardization of socialist principles. Hence, comrade is applicable.

I welcome socialism, comrades.

I dont mind moving from Albuquerque, but I dont like the move to New Orleans. I wanted out of the PCL and not relocating to another hurricane-susceptible market.

Not really fond of this move.

I personally think Obama will lose alot of voters come debate time, as he just sounds awful when he doesnt have a teleprompter in front of him and "uhh, umm, ahh" isnt an answer. Obama usually thinks about the answer instead of spouting out a trained response. Or at least he wants to appear he's thinking about it.... :lol And it's not like John McCain is an engaging speaker. The guy is probably the worst speaker of GOP nominees I can remember. Maybe Bob Dole. Actually I think McCain will do well in Friday's debate since it's on foreign policy. After that, not so much. But then again sometimes it's about expectations. McCain's generally seen as the foreign policy guy so if Obama can do okay it might be a win for him. Same thing for McCain if he can hold his own in the domestic issue debates. Then again sometimes these things don't make any difference. I think most people felt Kerry won the debates & it didn't change anything. For some reason my perception of 2004 is different. I thought Kerry managed to catch up somewhat to Bush after Bush had taken a huge post-convention lead because of the debate. Im hoping this debate benefits Obama like the first debate in 1980 benefitting Reagan. People will think McCain should give Obama "the celebrity" a lesson in foreign policy out by the woodshed. But Obama holding his own will play into his hands. Similiar to Bush/Gore 2000. I dont see him holding his own. He is a terrible on the fly speaker.