Jump to content
North Side Baseball

biittner77

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,035

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by biittner77

  1. biittner77
    I'd be more concerned about the Clinton's bringing him down than the Republicans. If Obama can survive the nomination process he can probably take anything the GOP can come up with. It's not like they can accuse him of "not being black enough" and his lack of experience in the senate is probably an advantage for reasons mentioned earlier. The real worry for Obama is the Clintons and what they can dig up on him and the lengths they they will go to discredit, humiliate or blackmail him.
  2. biittner77
    Agreed. I never thought of Clinton's elections that way. I'd say the last 2 were definitely "lesser of two evils" elections though. oh yeah... last one was definitely a turd sandwich vs giant douche. I voted enthusiastically for Clinton the first time. I stood in line for almost an hour to vote for him. I voted grudgingly for him the 2nd time. I wanted change but could not bring myself to vote for Bob Dole. So for me the last 3 have been lesser of 2 evils.
  3. biittner77
    This has been a very interesting discussion. It seems to me that except for hardliners on either side the last 3 elections have been lesser of 2 evils decisions. It would be really nice if both sides could come up with candidates that are judged on their own merits and ideas rather than party lines. I'm hoping that the race becomes McCain vs. Obama since those 2 I believe are the best options from either side.
  4. biittner77
    I can't say I agree with any of this though I really don't want this to turn into another political war so I'll respond this way: (for the bolded part) 9/11 changed everything. If people associate the Clinton's with the "good old days" then they are in for a very very big disappointment. They can't magic away terrorism. Bin Laden etal. are not going to turn themselves in and start loving America just because we have a new president. We have problems now that didn't exist back then. Clinton's track record for dealing with terrorists was less than spectacular. I won't argue the culpability of Bush regarding our foreign policy. But i disagree that his shortcomings automatically translate to every other Republican. Finally, I don't want Bill Clinton to be co President and it has nothing to do with Monica Lewinsky. I am definitely better off now than I was during the Clinton administration. Statements like the worse Dem is better than the best Rep. -or vice versa- are narrow minded and foolish. McCain for instance is much better than Kucinet (sp?), Obama is definitely better than Romney and Huckabee.
  5. biittner77
    How could the truth be terrible? It was DeWayne Staats (sp?) that worked with Thom B. in the all "Learn how to spell your own name correctly" booth.
  6. biittner77
    Melvin Mora is old and declining and probably hasn't played SS in years but he's still an upgrade over Theriot. :cry:
  7. biittner77
    His presence could also very easily undermine her presidency. I have a hard time believing that Bill Clinton is going to sit in the backround and stay out of his wife's way. Regardless, there will always be questions about how much influence he has over policy decisions.
  8. biittner77
    If Clinton wins the nomination, what will you do? It seems like a lot of people here prefer Obama. I have sort of a mirror image of this problem. I'm not sure if I trust Huckabee or Romney. Guliani seems like he's fading. McCain is not very conservative but is perhaps the most electable. Therefore, I'd have a difficult choice to make between say Huckabee and Obama. Thus I'm curious how the other side feels.
  9. biittner77
    Can Macias really make the Pirates worse?
  10. biittner77
    I know its been asked before but it bears repeating: Nippon Ham Fighters! Do they fight with ham? To defend ham? Using ham as a weapon? Either way its the coolest name in sports.
  11. biittner77
    If the Cubs got Figgins they wouldn't need Roberts Cubs get Figgins Angels get Gallagher, Marshall and Inge Tigers get Hart, Harvey & PTBNL yowza. you'd give up gallagher, marshall, hart, and harvey (who sucks, so whatever) for Figgins? Yeah, that is a bit much. That's a deal I'd like to give a Dodger Blues response to. I was trying to be realistic in what the Angels would probably want/ what Hendry would likely do. I wouldn't trade Gallagher straight up for Figgins.
  12. biittner77
    David Eckstein
  13. biittner77
    That's my most important requirement in any and all Cub acquisitions. Someone get Hendry on the phone. :D Sadly, being good looking is almost as useful as some of the other metrics that Hendry uses on a regular basis. Handsome: it's the new grittiness
  14. biittner77
    What about Jason Giambi and Mark McGwire? They have both been named as steroid users and were trashed by the media. The difference is that McGwire didn't lie about it and Giambi accepted responsiblity for what he had done. Bonds lied to a grand jury. There's a big difference. Race probably plays some role in all of this but how much we won't really know until we see how the media handles things with Clemens. He is arguably as big of a jerk as Bonds.
  15. biittner77
    The only problem with retro jersey day is the other team wearing their present day jerseys and making the whole thing look sort of dumb. Hopefully this game will be scheduled against a team that actually existed in 1948.
  16. biittner77
    I'm not sure how I this makes much sense for Prior. If there wasn't much interest in trading for him, does he really think he'll get anything better than a make good 1 plus option contract from anyone else? It seems to me that prior wants a multi year deal but why would anyone do that for a guy that may never pitch again?
  17. biittner77
    If the Cubs got Figgins they wouldn't need Roberts Cubs get Figgins Angels get Gallagher, Marshall and Inge Tigers get Hart, Harvey & PTBNL
  18. biittner77
    Without looking it up, I think Bedard is younger than Hill. He's more established in the tougher league. Bedard does better without his good stuff than Hill does- hence the "Hill is too inconsistent" theory. I can't help but wonder if Bedard is damaged goods. So what if he's the leading seller at the jerk store. How can you trade your best pitcher, who's also young unless you get a really good haul in return.
  19. biittner77
    By then they will have unloaded Rolen and Edmonds. They found a way to pay Pujols and Carpenter, I'd bet they'd find a way to pay Bedard.
  20. biittner77
    I disagree. Unless the Cubs win the WS they can play the "Bring us to the next level" card. I can't see the fans revolting over Hendry getting fired. Nor do I see the press having much of a reaction since the new owner would simply be bringing in his own guy.
  21. biittner77
    The Chicago Sun Times said Wouldn't this qualify as "Worst News Ever"?
  22. biittner77
    And the right deal would be to get sent to San Francisco? Ughh. He can forget about postseason baseball for a long time if that's the case. Probably, but the flight home would be 6 hours shorter.
  23. biittner77
    I'd be happy with that too. But if we're going to make Pie into something he's not, and very likely never will be let's make him into mid 1990s Sosa.
  24. biittner77
    The addition of Roberts alone at least eliminates the temptation to have Pie lead off. That in itself has to have some value. I'd hate to see the Cubs try to turn him into Brett Butler.
  25. biittner77
    He also kinda sucks at baseball
×
×
  • Create New...