Yardbarker Nav Bar

Thursday, December 11, 2008

On CC's rider and the Melkman delivering Mike Cameron to the Yankees

The baseball hot stove is bubbling over with a plethora of signings and trades. So there's a lot to squawk about. Let's get it started.

The latest news out of Yankeeland is that Melky Cabrera is set to go to Milwaukee for Mike Cameron. So much for the Yanks' youth movement, eh? The Bergen Record is reporting the following:
On the condition of anonymity, the source said the Yankees would be willing to extend Cameron to a two-year contract through the 2010 season. The Brewers had picked up Cameron’s 2009 option for $10 million, and a two-year deal with the Yanks could be worth about $17 million total.
How Melky Cabrera sunk from being one of the more pleasurable players to watch on the Yanks over the past few seasons to being the easiest out on the roster is a big mystery to me. But what's even more head-scratching is why the Yanks would even consider extending Mike Cameron's contract, given that he's nearly 36 now. Not to mention what will happen to Brett Gardner. What, exactly, is to be gained in giving Cameron another year?

Speaking of head-scratching moves, why the Yankees are even thinking about signing A.J. Burnett is beyond me, let alone offering him $80 million, considering they've already been burned by one injury-prone former Marlin pitcher with Carl Pavano. (Of course, the Red Sox didn't get burned by their own injury-prone former Marlin pitcher, Josh Beckett, but I digress!)

It's strange times to think that I would prefer Derek Lowe to Burnett and Sheets, but I do. At least Lowe is a healthy big-game pitcher (albeit one who makes those, well, Derek Lowe faces when things go wrong!) Don't think Derek is worth a four-year, $66 million deal, though.

And yes, the numbers the Yanks are willing to shell out this year are simply mind-boggling. Given 1) the recession we're currently in, and 2) the fact that the Yanks just went back to the city of New York to beg for more cash for their stadium, I have to say that even this Yankee fan finds these contract numbers a bit unseemly and over the top. Don't mean to get all Joe Hill here, but there it is.

Oprah Winfrey toned down her yearly Favorite Things extravaganza to reflect the economic realities this country is facing. Not the Yanks. A few days ago, I thought that $10 million for Andy Pettitte was reasonable. But given the money the Bombers are willing to throw around this week, that figure now looks awfully cheap.

Am I happy the Yanks got CC Sabathia? Of course. He's a heck of a pitcher. But I am a bit concerned that they overpaid for him, given that they were essentially bidding against themselves. And his three-year opt out clause worries me - if he's already planning an escape hatch before he's even come to New York, that's a real concern. He does seem like a very likeable guy, though - hopefully he'll fit right in with the Yanks, pitch great, and all these concerns will be moot next year.

While the Yanks are on a spending spree, the Mets are making deals, like getting J.J. Putz. Congrats, Squawker Jon - your team's bullpen looks pretty awesome. And in keeping with that era of good feeling. I'm going to resist making a joke about your new reliever's last name!


* * *

I was on three radio programs over the course of 23 hours squawking about the winter meetings, and I had a terrific time on all three shows. Thanks to Dos Amigos, Sound-Off with Sinkoff, and NYBaseball Digest for having me on.

Coming later today, my thoughts on where Manny Ramirez will end up. But in the meantime, tell us what you think about all these moves.

44 comments:

Ryan O said...

What is their projected payroll this year?

Uncle Mike said...

Who cares what the payroll is? Results matter, nothing else.

Melky Cabrera: 24, a man who's batted .283, has had a 73-RBI season, good speed, makes sensational catches, and made $461 K last season; but is also immature and has disappeared in 2 postseason appearances.

Mike Cameron: A good homer and RBI man, good speed, and good on defense; but will be 36, has never batted higher than .273, strikes out at a rate that would make Mickey Mantle say, "Holy s---!", is injury-prone, hasn't done appreciably better in postseason play than Melky, and made $6.25 M last season.

Given the choice, I'd stick with Melky: You can, conceivably, teach better attitude, and while Cameron would be more productive now, Melky stands a much better chance of being productive in three years.

Ryan O said...

I'm just curious, if they sign Lowe, Burnett and Texeira what would your estimate be.

Tim said...

"Red Sox close to signing Texeira", from Ken Rosenthal. Lisa, why at this point would anything Cashman did make you scratch your head?

Anonymous said...

The opt out clause says it all--he did not want NY, but wanted the money-who wouldn't. Cameron and Burnett only add to a long list of
Cashman's follies-easy when you are spending someone's elses money.
Full blown panic has set in in NY and again we are going to pay huge sums for sub-par talent(Burnett&Cameron). If Boston adds Texiera we will still be chasing them instead of the other way around. Add the greatly improved Rays are 3rd place may be our comfort zone until someone gets smart and gets rid of Cashman, but then again he is only acting as an agent for ownership!!

Anonymous said...

Yankee fans should be thrilled to be rid of Melky Cabrera - the most overrated non-prospect of the past five years. Not one scout outside of New York ever thought he would be more than a fourth outfielder, and his stats have proved that consistently.

Yankee fans love to point to his "impressive" rookie year where he hit .280, and then followed it up with a .273 BA. They conveniently forgot that his OBP has been in free fall and that he has exhibited next to no power - he's never even slugged .400! His adjusted OPS has been below league average EVERY season, including his rookie year. He is, at best, a fourth outfielder on a team that envisions contending, and a fringe starter on a poor team.

Milwaukee will rue the day they made this trade.

Cesar said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cesar said...

Mike is right, results matter. But when a $200M team doesn't even make the postseason, pretty much everything matters.

The Emperor said...

Yankees took $88 Million off the payroll after 2008 and will take off another $35 in 2009.

CC at $23 per year, Burnett at $16per year, Lowe at $16 per year only equals $55 Million per year up to this point, assuming these other guys sign.

The payroll in 2009 will look very much like it did this year, perhaps even a bit less. You better believe they have and extra $20-$22 Million per year to throw at Texeira to bring him to NY and keep him away from the Red Sox.

I really hope this is a directly the Yankees are going to get very serious about.

As for CC's opt-out clause, yeah I'm a little concerned about that, too. I just hope everything works out okay.

Uncle Mike said...

Panic? In New York? Surely, you're talking about Flushing. The Yankees do not panic.

Anonymous said...

offering nearly double what the next guy did isn't panic? adding mike cameron to play center is the move of a rational team? 85 million for aj burnett? 315 million offered for 3 players isn't an overreaction, huh?
how about completely abandoning the direction that they wanted to go in 1 year ago to throw tons of money at free agents? silly.
and the mets moved haven't reacted in an irresponsible way. they built one of the best 8th and 9th inning combos in baseball by trade and waiting out the market, not by setting it!

The Emperor said...

Overreaction, perhaps. Panic? No.

The Yankees will forever shape and reshape the landscape of MLB when it comes to the acquisition of talent and issuing contracts. The Yankees are known for having an open wallet and a willingness to spend and not run out of money, and since the Yankees drive up the value of players, it forces other team owners to remove the lining of their pockets to keep up and to try and be competetive.

We may not win it all every year, but the Yankees are the almighty baseball empire (evil or otherwise - it's all subjective) and you have to concede to one fact: Over the long haul the Yankees will always wind up winning more championships than anyone else. We have the most money, the most resources, and the desire, and because of that the odds will always favor us with the highest percentage of probablity of winning it all. Again, not always, but more often as compared to everyone else.

This is the way it was in the past; this is the way it will be in the future. It can happen again as soon as next year.

The Emperor said...

Comment deleted
This post has been removed by the author.

December 11, 2008 1:21 PM


Jeez, Lisa - I wish I read what this post said and who wrote it before you deleted it! Curiosity is driving me nuts. :-)

The Emperor said...

"We have the most money, the most resources, and the desire, and because of that the odds will always favor us with the highest percentage of probablity of winning it all."

And WHY is it this way? Simple: Because of what we've accomplished in the past that all you non-Yankee fans like to dismiss as meaningless. If the 26 championships we've won so far is so meaningless because the last one was in 2000, then how come we are the most well-known the world-over, the most prominent, the wealthiest, the most fabled, the most envied, and the most prolific sports franchise on the planet? How come people in places like Cambodia recognize the interlocking NY of the Yankees more than any other logo or symbol of any other team combined?

Because of our meaningless history? C'mon people - before we were dominant in the 90's, we were stagnant in the 80's and prior to that dominat in the late 70's, prior to that stagnant in the 60's and early 70's. We completely obliterated everyone in the 50's.

Yes, we haven't won in 8 years - but it's just a matter of time before we do -- again, and then we'll have a brand new dynasty to piss all you non-Yankee fans off with -- again.

Anonymous said...

Emperor, you have a habit of making these fantastic claims without a lick of fact to support them. perhaps you should go to forbes and check out the worlds wealthiest teams. the yankees aren't even the wealthiest team in the U.S., nevermind the world.

and the previous 26 are meaningless today. they are history, and you should be proud of them no doubt, but who cares? the world champions are the phillies, not the yankees.

and the yankees have not reshaped the landscape of mlb, just the bronx. the outbid themselves for arod and sabathia. sabathia was a panic move. the offer was 140, and noone came close to it, so what did desperate cashman do, who is probably out of a job if the yankees don't at least make the playoffs? he threw and extra $20 million on top of the pile, and gave the guy a 3 yr out!
km

James said...

I think what the Yankees did makes sense. Melky was awful and should not have a starting job. Cameron is a good placeholder until Austin Jackson comes up. I think the extension is being offered to make sure Austin isn't forced to the big leagues too soon.

-- guinness

Anonymous said...

The Yankees ARE desparate. They outbid themselves with CC, offered $60M more than the next best offer and gave the opt-out clause (you think they would have learned a lesson from A-Rod on that). It's amazing how impatient the Yankees are. No one was going to come anywhere near their initial offer and CC would have accepted it eventually -- no one walks away from $140M when the next best offer is $100M. Now, it seems the Yankees are going to offer $80M for a starting pitcher who has been in the majors for 10 years but has 200+ IP in only 3 of those years. And I think they are going to end up with Texeira as well, probably giving him a 10 year deal. Amazing. The Yankees may finally accomplish the feat that has eluded them the past few years -- purchasing the championship.

Fred Garvin

The Emperor said...

Anonymous - history doesn't lie, and what has happened in the past is the reason why the Yankees are capable of doing what they can do now and in the future.

The wealthiest team in the world may be Manchester United, but when it comes to baseball at least, who's topping us?

Yes, we overspend, but guess what? We can. We can absorb the expense and ride through mistakes and still compete almost every year.

I don't need to provide support for my fantastic claims. History and current events speak loudly for themselves.

And for you to say our 26 championships are meaningless - as compared to your 2 spectacular life-altring ones? I guess those are worthless, too, huh?

Alvaro Fernandez Ravelo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alvaro Fernandez Ravelo said...

I'm not crazy about AJ either but he does have good numbers against the Red Sox and Rays and injuries will happen to any one of the projected starting rotation and we can call up Hughes, Aceves or Kennedy.
It's kind of unrealistic but I wish we could sign Teixeira.

Anonymous said...

Yankees paid too much for Sabathia but whats done is done-he was the best available this yr. Burnett is another story-5yrs too long let Atlanta take that chance--If they can pick up Sheets for 2 yrs and Pettitte for one, let Hughes continue to make progress,take a longer look at Aceves. IMO you will never see Kennedy in the NY rotation at the major league level on a regular basis. Texiera is a must to jump start the offense that really struggled last yr. As for 26 championships that is something to be proud of but we need to get back to that formula and start winning again.

Uncle Mike said...

Emperor: Isn't it interesting that Met fans who say we're living in the past... have to. Every now and then, one of them says "We OWNED New York in the 1980s!" Well, guess what: Ronald Reagan is dead, minivans have given way to SUVs (not that this is a good thing), Atari systems and Commodore computers are garage-sale fare, Meryl Streep is passe, and the only headlines Madonna makes these days are unflattering -- and, as Yankee Fans, we know!

You're also right that history doesn't lie, whether good (26 titles) or bad (2, with the Mets having more choke seasons than postseasons). If 26 titles are "meaningless," where's the cutoff? Only titles won from October 1969 onward count? Fine, then it's Yankees 6, Mets 2. How about only titles from November 1986 onward count? Then it's Yankees 4, Mets 0. Actually, we don't even have to back that far. Let's start from October 2000 forward, how about that?

"Anonymous" is misleading: The Yankees are the wealthiest baseball team. By contrast, there are two North American sports teams that are wealthier, the NFL's Washington Redskins and Dallas Cowboys -- and neither would be without the rivalry they share, which used to be as nasty as Yankees-Red Sox, until the Yanks and Sox, in the words of Sox fan Emeril Lagasse, kicked it up a notch.

And Manchester United? They're the Cowboys of England: Just as Cowboy fans think NFL Championships from the pre-Super Bowl era don't count (oh yes they do: Giants 7, Cowboys 5), ManUre fans think titles won in the old "Football League" -- it's been the "Premier League" since 1992 -- don't count, and when did they start winning a bunch of titles? Take a wild guess as to the year: 1992. Fans of real football clubs call them "prawn sandwich eaters." Behind Manchester City, Man Useless is the second-most popular team in Manchester. They're also the second-most popular team in London, behind Arsenal. And the most popular team in the Middle East, and in Asia. Unlike most soccer teams, the majority of their fans aren't even in their country.

Number 3 in London is Chelsea, recently bought by a Russian oil billionaire, who then "bought" them two Premiership titles, in 2004 and 2005, after not having won any since 1955. As a result, they're known as Chelski, and fans of the more successful Arsenal and Liverpool sing, "(Bleep) off, Chelski F.C., you ain't got no history!" But they act like their two recent titles are more important than Liverpool's record 18, Man U's 17 and Arsenal's 13. Sound familiar? At least they wear blue, not red (socks).

A move to sign Sabathia is a "panic move"? Right. Let me ask you: Whose Vice Presidential pick was a panic move: Obama's to take Biden, due to needing to shore up his foreign-policy credentials; or McCain's to take Palin, due to needing to shore up "the conservative base"? No, the true panic move was the Mets signing K-Rod.

The Emperor said...

You're not kidding, Mike.

By, I'll tell ya' - the audacity of some people. I'm being told that the history of my team is meaningless because it's in the past by a fan of a team that's doen nothing but mainly flush their fans' dreams down the toilet for most of their existance.

Flushing couldn't be a more aptly-names place for that team to be located in.

EVERYTHING that takes place in our Universe ALWAYS becomes the past. We don't live in a universe where there is no timeline and everything is etrnal. All things travel on the timeline from future-to-present-to-past.

Try telling a judge about to sentence a criminal to prison that, because his crimes were committed in the PAST, they are no longer relevant and therefore prison time is meaningless. The charges would only be meaningful as long and they are in an eternal state of perpetuality.

Know what? The Phillies' championship happened in October! this is now December, therefore according to the logic of our anonymous friend, the championship is meaningless. Right?

Being told that the Yankees' 26 championships are meaningless because they happened in the past is one of stupidest, most asinine and feckless comments that any non-Yankee fan can ever make.

I mean, c'mon, are they really serious???

Anonymous said...

Cameron to replace Melky doesn't make any sense at all. Cameron lifetime .250 hitter with more K's1642 than hits 1474--age 36 earning 10mill. Melky .268 hitter, 385 hits, 187K's age 24, earning around $400,000. What happened to Cashman's "desire to get younger" idea. Why have the yankees given up on him and not Cano? Why not give this kid some of the special attention they seem to be giving Cano. As Forrest Gump would say "stupid is as stupid does"!

The Emperor said...

Gee, I don't know, Anonymous - I mean, why go after and sign a pitcher well past his prime that's been often injured limited productivity along with a tendency to bean people in the head and throw old men to the ground? I mean, why go after and sign a replacement for a Hall of Fame catcher with someone who whines and bitches all the time while bedding teenage girls young enough to be his daughter?

Why sign a used up old pitcher who'd much rather die and get burried in The South and expect him to deliver you to the promised land against a sub-par Marlins team on the last day of the regular season?

Come again with the Forrest Gump quotes...what's that again...??

The Emperor said...

You can say the Yankees have often made signings like this - granted, but the Mets are certainly no stranger to doing the exact same thing.

How's that saying go with the pot and the black kettle...??

The Emperor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Emperor said...

Ha! Check out this article from si.com!

Don't mean to rub salt in the wound, but...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/12/11/Hamels.Mets.ap/index.html

The Emperor said...

The remainder of the URL for the article link I provided is:

11/Hamels.Mets.ap/index.html

Anonymous said...

"Try telling a judge about to sentence a criminal to prison that, because his crimes were committed in the PAST, they are no longer relevant and therefore prison time is meaningless. The charges would only be meaningful as long and they are in an eternal state of perpetuality."--Emperor

Emperor, you should just stick to being MINJ's lapdog, when you try to think for yourself it never seems to work out!
As most people over the age of 12 know, there are statutes of limitations on crime, with the exception of murder and, in some jurisdictions, sex crimes against children. therefore a judge would NOT be able to sentence a criminal for a crime that occurred in the past if that criminal was not arrested prior to the statute running out. whether that crime exists in "perpetuality" or not.
I would say that 8 years is probably a fair amount of time to have passed for the statute of limitation on celebrating a world series win to have run out. But, alas, do not fret, your team will do all that they can to purchase a new world series for you, so you will have a new reason to celebrate, one more relevant than the other 26 you seem to want to hold on to!
km

The Emperor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Emperor said...

Look, KM - stop being a pain in the ass with your attempts at your little digs. If Mike and I get along and by coincidence think alike on a lot of things, it's because great minds often do.

You live on your own strange little planet where no advanced life really exists.

Yes, I know that most crimes have statutes of limitations. You're not going to believe this, but I'm actually pretty intelligent and educated. That means I'm aware fo things like that. I know murder does not.

See, now, what you're doing is grasping at straws by dissecting what I'm saying and trying to be critical of my words line-by-line. I was being overly generalized in my comments about judges and sentencing for crimes. I was trying to get the message across that when someone is IN COURT, standing in FRONT OF THE JUDGE about to be sentenced, the judge is not going to say, "Oh, since you robbed this bank last month and not at this very instant, than I have no reason to sentence you because it happened in the PAST, and it's now meaningless"

I don't think it's feasibly possible to make a clearer analogy than what I've stated in the above paragraph without talking to you like you're five years old.

Anonymous said...

Emperor, I will be nice because I get the sense you may be a little "delicate", if ya know what I mean. a little slow on the uptake. your analogy was lacking, mostly because it was nonsense, but I won't beat a dead horse.

Be a yankee fan. enjoy yourself, and your past successes. realize that your 26 does not mean a thing to other fans, any more or less than my 2 do.

relish the history for what it is, history. no sports franchise can claim the history that the yankees do, that should be a source of pride.

This is the present though, and until they win another what they have done in the past doesn't matter to any except those who live in the past, notably, your liege, grandpa mike.

Also realize that the fans of other teams are not going to celebrate yankee successes with you, especially considering what is happening now. baseball fans not beholden to the yankees see them as attempting to buy success. yes they have more money to spend than others, but if they choose to throw absurd amounts of money at allstars to play for them, you can't expect baseball fans to give them any credit for winning. it really is a no-win scenario for the yankees. if they win, it is because they are supposed to, if they lose, like the last 8 years, then they look like fools. so enjoy your team, and defend them as i would my own, but don't be surprised that baseball fans wish the yankees ill.

The Emperor said...

KM, as a Yankee fan that automatically puts me in the enviable position of being many steps ahead of you, especially since you root for a crappy, second-rate team that, in my opinion, has no business being in NY.

The Mets do not represent NYC well at all, and in spite of your perception that I'm, as you say, "slow on the uptake", you will never be able to compare or compete with anything that I can ever say.

Your arguments are weak and desperate, and since you really don't have anything worthwhile to bring to the table to serve as any type of defense for your claims or retorts, your comments will continue to be relegated to the status of empty, envious drivel that, for all intents and purposes, no longer warrent any attention.

Have fun!

The Emperor said...

"Also realize that the fans of other teams are not going to celebrate yankee successes with you, especially considering what is happening now. baseball fans not beholden to the yankees see them as attempting to buy success. yes they have more money to spend than others, but if they choose to throw absurd amounts of money at allstars to play for them, you can't expect baseball fans to give them any credit for winning."

Quite frankly, I don't really give a rat's ass what everyone else really thinks and whether they want to celebrate our history or not. It's not for you non-Yankee fans, it's for us Yankee fans. And whether or not people think the Yanks try to buy championships, here's a translation: The Yankees are willing to do whatever it takes to provide the best product for us fans.

That's not being greedy, that's being quite generous. If other team owners are stingy and decide to pocket the money they get from the Yankees through revenue sharing, shame on them. That has nothing to do with the Yankees or their goals, and if others don't like it, well either put up or shup up. It's really that simple.

Anonymous said...

sorry emperor, i spoke incorrectly and judged your wrong. you're not slow on the uptake, apparently, after reading that nonsense your responded with, you are slow on the uptake, outtake, intake, and any other take you want to consider. take your own advice and save yourself the embarrassment of responding to my posts. every time you try to come off as inteligent and insightful, you proove yourself to be just the opposite.

generous? generous would be funding the stadium on their own, and not asking for an additional $450 million from NY after spending $240 million on 2 players! you really should have grandpa mike edit your posts for you so you don't look like such a jackass!
km

The Emperor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Emperor said...

And I suppose Citifield is fully funded by the Mets, huh? What, are they changing their name to the NY Citis or something?

The Emperor said...

One more thing, KM, just to set the record straight - Mike isn't very much older than I am. You call him Grandpa, but he's probably in his early 50s.

You talk and react like some kid still in his 20s - is that you? Are some smart-mouthed 20-something kid who thinks he knows everything?

If you a man in his mid-to-late 30's or older, don't you think you're coming across being just a little bit ridiculous calling Mike "grandpa"?? I mean, what are you, 18 years old?

I'm just curious, because if it turns out that you're some young punk, than I'll stroke your little ego and let you have the last word since it probably will give you a hard-on or something.

If you're older, than all jokes aside, you really should be ashamed of yourself using such pathetic epithets as "geriatric" and "elderly" towards someone who may not even be old enough to be your father.

Think about it.

Anonymous said...

i am beginning to think that you and the old, wise one are related. or otherwise involved.
Don't worry about how old I am, or whether I feel any guilt over giving grandpa mike a hard time. he is man enough to stick-up for himself, and has done so quite frequently.
Just worry about checking the facts on the drivel you post to avoid making ridiculous claims. yes, the mets did use city money to build their stadium, at about 1/2 what the yankees are spending to boot. they recently asked for @$85 million more, as compared to the $350-450 million more the yankees want. difference is, besideds the absurd difference in $$$, is that the mets are asking for money that has already been given to them. when the money was allocated, they took less than the full amount, now they are in need of the 85 they did not take. the yankees are just looking to blow through another 1/2 billion. all while spending 1/4 billion on 2 players, with more to come!

Anonymous said...

and emperor, you refer to me as some young punk, and yet you post a term for a male erection in such graphic terms? on a site where children may be participating? who is the punk, young or old?
km

The Emperor said...

Why am I getting under your skin so much??

My claims are based on perceptions from one side of the coin, your from the other. You hate the Yankees, so you see all the negatives. I love them, so I see the positives -- but you cannot deny that I don't get on them when they screw up.

And you can't accuse me of having a closed mind to other teams. Did I not root for the Rays to win the WS this year? Did I not express my support for them?

It's the same way with the Mets. I don't like them, so I see the negatives. You love them, so you see them in a positive light.

Yes, both teams used the city's money to help with the new stadiums. I know that. The Yankees are asking for quite a bit more, sure, but I have no doubts that they will be able to make it back. The Yankees probably have a higher revenue stream, so they ask for more money with the perception that they can pay it back.

I just take exception to when people accuse the Yankees of doing everything wrong when their teams do different things wrong. People just focus on the money - what I meant earlier about being generous is that they offer large, lucrative contracts to players. They spend more money because they have more money. What I was trying to get across is that they don't pocket the money and keep it all for themselves and have an attitude like they want to screw the fans over.

Was it panic spending so much money? No, i don't think so, to me it's more of a rush to business as usual. The Yankees are a global operation that must run at peak capacity, which means, at a minimum, four million paying customers per year, strong ratings on their regional sports network and a postseason berth. They had $80 million coming off their 2008 payroll, and may even come in with a lower payroll for 2009 when all is said and done.

What are they supposed to do, ignore all those people that demand the best out of them? With success comes a lot of responsibility, KM. I think you understand that. I'm not trying to make you feel sorry for the Yankees, just trying to make you understand what I meant with those meaningless drivel comments that you accuse me of making. I hope I made better sense this time.

And please stop comparing me to Mike. I don't know him from Adam and we're two completely different people that live in two different parts of the country. We jsut think alike on some things, that's all. On other things, we don't.

I'm 38 years old, and to me that's far too old to be living in anyone's shadow. I've been an independent-minded individal for a long time.

Can we just stop this online bickering and enjoy the Hot Stove?

The Emperor said...

"and emperor, you refer to me as some young punk, and yet you post a term for a male erection in such graphic terms?"

Such graphic terms? Oh, for christsakes will you please stop exaggerating??

The Emperor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.