Controlled Chaos

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Nov 6, 2007 -> 09:38 AM) -People who stand underneath awnings while it is raining... with their umbrellas still out... -groups of people who walk 3-4-5 people accross a sidewalk, and make no effort to give way to other people... As a fellow commuter I have to agree with this 100%. I can write a whole fricken thread on the s*** that pisses me off as a commuter.

I laughed out loud multiple times. I thought it was great.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Nov 2, 2007 -> 02:52 AM) The plot thickens... I spoke with Mary yesterday and asked her what she thinks might be behind all of this. She told me that a few days before the talk with the HR woman, she was asked out on a date by a VP of the company. She politely and directly declined the offer. She suspects that this information got back to the all male, uppper management 'clique' and that this newly imposed dress code might be a form of revenge or punishment. In other words, Ok b****, if you're not gonna let any of us have it, then we're not gonna allow you to throw it our faces every day either. Of course, this is all pure speculation and would be impossible to prove. I don't believe this is sexual harrasment per se, but it has to be in violation of something. What exactly does she do again?

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 11:24 PM) My good friend, we'll call her Mary, works for an IT company in Chicago. On Friday, the HR person told her that the president of the compay thinks her attire is unprofessional. When she asked for an explanation, the HR person told her that she didn't think Mary's clothes are unprofessional, but that she was doing her job by relaying a message from the President. Mary then told her immediate boss about the incident and he said he didn't know anything about it and also agreed that in his opinion, her attire is not unprofessional. Mary freaks out and goes shopping over the weekend for pants and sweaters that are two sizes too big on her. Monday and Tuesday she shows up for work in huge pants and sweaters, flat shoes wearing no make up and her hair pulled back into a pony tail. Today, the pres. calls Mary into his office and says: "Mary, you're a beautiful woman with a beautiiful body and I just want to make sure that our clients remember you for your work and not for your apperance". She is visibly upset by this conversation and he comments that: "wow, you look like you're gonna cry." She says " No, but I have a lot of work to get back to" and leaves. As she's walking out, he says: "By the way, you look very nice today". Mary and I met at work a few years ago and she is one of the most beautiful women I've ever seen. She wore skirts to her knees, high heels, never open toe shoes, nice blouses. Nothing she wore was whorerish, or too sexy or unprofessional. The 'problem' is that she is so hot, she's gonna look sexy in anything she wears. By the way, their employee manual is very vague on the dress code. It simply states 'business casual'. Also, her work is flawless and the pres. has even told her that numerous times in the past. Legally, is this a form of harassment? What can she do? A so hot, she's gonna look sexy in anything she wears IT chick?? I agree with SSI, I need to see a pic. It's not harrassment, but it's so weird for me to hear any boss say something to an employee along the lines of "you have a beautiful body" I mean unless said employee works at a gym or something, it's just weird.

That was quick.

Hey Chan Ho, Park it over there. Look David, Justice was served Ryan, The Riot started cause your team sucks plain and simple. How about a haiku: Flour Explosion left us a Dusty Baker unfased, Brent Cooks on

http://cgi.ebay.com/Original-Harry-Reid-Ru...1QQcmdZViewItem

You guys missed it. At Steep and Cheap, we sell premium, core outdoor gear and clothing at prices that are downright criminal. Here’s how it works: Steep and Cheap sells one screamin’ deal at a time until it’s gone. The deals are fat (up to 80% off and no less than 50% off), so they sell out fast. You have to act fast or you’ll miss it, but don’t stress—as soon as one deal sells out, we kick off another. It’s back-to-back deals all day long They were these http://www.thesunglassmenagerie.com/razrwire.html for $56.00

QUOTE(Brian @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 02:46 PM) I have the same pair of Oakley's since college. I don't even wear them, but it was too good a deal to pass up. If I don't like them...they'll make a nice xmas present for someone.

http://www.steepandcheap.com/?id=VAddMdYC

It's like Man of the Year.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 12:09 AM) Does anybody else think its ironic that Friday Night Lights new night is actually on Friday nights? Which you would think would eliminate most of their target audience because most people who would like a show about high school football would probably be at a high school football game on Friday night http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?s=...t&p=1513479

What are you dressing up as?

Jena Six -- Another Story of Unequal Justice for Blacks? By Larry Elder Thursday, September 27, 2007 About the so-called Jena Six, reasonable people can disagree about whether or not prosecutors initially charged the Jena, La., defendants too harshly. The black teenage defendants stand accused of beating a white teenager unconscious. Authorities, at first, charged five of the six with attempted murder, although now none of them faces attempted murder charges. Supporters of the Jena Six claim that whites hung nooses on a tree, thus provoking a series of interracial clashes. Revs. Sharpton and Jackson claim that harsh treatment of the Jena Six serves as a metaphor for the continued unequal justice for blacks in America. Really? Jackson, speaking in Jena, claimed that more blacks sit in jail than in college. Irrelevant as to the issue at hand, and false. According to the 2000 census, there were over 2.2 million blacks in college. By mid-year 2006, according to the Justice Department, 905,600 blacks were in state or federal prisons and local jails. Even if Jackson meant black men, his assertion is still debatable. The Justice Policy Institute found that at the time of the 2000 census, 603,000 black men were in college, while 791,000 were in jail. Yet only 179,000 of incarcerated blacks were between 18 and 24 years old, the customary "college age." Jackson, in Jena, cited the unequal treatment in prosecuting crack versus powder drug violations as evidence of racial discrimination. This calls for an explanation. Crack violators, the ones subject to the harshest punishment, are often black. But members of the Black Congressional Caucus, in the '80s, pushed for stiff sentences against those peddling crack, given the violence -- mostly in urban areas -- associated with it. Nearly half of the members of the Black Congressional Caucus voted for the 1986 anti-drug bill, which provided stiff sentences for crack. The federal Sentencing Commission, during the Clinton administration, recommended equalizing the penalty for crack and powder. Clinton signed legislation to block the recommendations. Jackson and Sharpton suggest that the disproportionate number of blacks under the criminal justice system stems from racism. But black defendants are more likely to be acquitted than white defendants. A study in the '90s found blacks convicted less frequently than whites in all but two of 14 categories of felony crimes, including murder, rape, burglary, felony theft, drug trafficking and other crimes against people. The only two types of felonies where blacks were not convicted at a lower rate than whites were felony traffic offenses and miscellaneous felonies. Cases that went to juries (only 2.8 percent of those examined) had a similar pattern, although juries convicted blacks more than whites for robbery, assault and property offenses. What about the assertion that a black defendant, with the same record, is likely to serve more time than a white defendant? Many legal experts blame the results on economics -- white defendants are more likely to hire a private counselor who can get them a better deal in the courtroom. Other factors that can sway judges include family support, job security and the ability to make bail -- with white defendants more likely than blacks to fit this description. And black judges are more likely than white judges to give black defendants harsher sentences than white defendants. What about DWB, Driving While Black? Many big-city police departments now record stops by race. But the compiled information tells you nothing about why police stop drivers. George Mason University professor Matthew Zingraff, who studied racial profiling, says, "Why a police officer makes a stop of an individual, we'll never know that. We'll never know the number of people who have not been stopped. It doesn't tell us motivation. It doesn't tell us what caught the police officer's eye." Supporters of the Jena Six say their actions were sparked by the "hate crime" of the hanging of three -- later reported as two -- nooses on a high school campus tree. This, activists say, shows a prevalence of hate crimes against blacks in America. But economist Walter Williams notes that when hate crime statistics are adjusted for blacks' lower population numbers, proportionally, blacks commit more than twice as many hate crimes as whites. Rev. Sharpton calls Jena the "Selma of its day." Let's revisit. In Selma, Ala., in 1965, 500 to 600 civil rights protesters tried to march in support of black voter registration. Local authorities attacked the marchers with whips and tear gas and billy clubs, leaving 17 people in the hospital. For what it's worth, an Associated Press-AOL Black Voices survey asked blacks to name the "most important black leader." More blacks named "nobody" than anybody else. Jackson was named by 15 percent of respondents; 2 percent named Rev. Sharpton; and Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, an organization also active in supporting the Jena 6, was named by 4 percent. Maybe that's the real lesson of Jena.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 5, 2007 -> 02:20 PM) No thanks on Cora, but you make a good point that has been brought up here before - Ozzie needs a good bench coach. I've been watching Kirk Gibson be a great foil for Bob Melvin, for example, and that works really well. A really solid baseball guy who understands game tactics is a real need for Ozzie. Well I know Cora will never be let go...So the only way to get a bench coach in here is to move him somewhere else. 3rd base is now vacant...I certainly wasn't choosing him for the position based on competence...

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Oct 5, 2007 -> 02:13 PM) Shines gone, Cave reassigned, Yet Walker is still with the team, WTF Stick Cora back at third and hire a competent bench coach.

I'm not sure if I should post my dissenting opinion in this thread or not, but here goes. I dislike Bonds very much so and would have trouble feeling good about winning anything with him as the catalyst. The win's would be tainted IMO. Don't get me wrong I root for the laundry, but I prefer my laundry to be clean. Bonds would leave an indelible mark on this franchise...win or lose.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Oct 5, 2007 -> 08:47 AM) Some jerk in my league already nabbed him... Need all the help I can get in that league.

QUOTE(AssHatSoxFan @ Oct 5, 2007 -> 08:50 AM) hopefully people had Selvin anyways after Henry's ankle sprain aginst the Colts I grabbed him in my main league the minute after I saw the replay on Henry's injury. It looked like to me like he was done. I almost dropped him Wednesday to pick up Kenton Keith cause the news all week on Henry appeared that the injury wasn't serious. I decided to hold out and then this news came out. I would have been kickin myself in the ass if I dropped him. With regards to Henry's appeal...does he even have a leg to stand on? Is the league required to allow the players 'experts' to be there for every test? How does that work if the tests are supposed to be surprises? Does the player get to put off the test until his 'experts' arrive? This sounds like a crock and I can't believe the league left a loop hole like this.

Go grab Selvin Young now. Travis Henry will most likely be suspended for the year. The news is out so act fast.

My in-laws are pretty laid back. My MIL watches my daughter 3 days a week so my wife can work part time, so I am extermely grateful. My FIL is way old school. He's a carpenter from Italy. He doesn't talk much, but man he is a master with wood. He makes some unbelievable furniture and made my daughter a beautiful curio cabinet that matches her bedroom set. I was never really into woodworking, but I hope to learn some tricks from him. I also made wine with them a couple weekends ago...that was pretty cool. I'm pretty happy with my in laws, with the small exception of my BIL. He's a Cubs fan.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Oct 3, 2007 -> 12:24 PM) I started following later on and it definitely got better and better. I don't get why it was moved to Friday's though, luckily my DVR can stay home on Friday and I'll just watch it some other day. Yeah I thought it got better and better. I don't really care about them winning State cause there is so much more to the show than the football games. Umm isn't a large part of their fan base most likely busy on Friday nights?? Dumb move.

QUOTE(juddling @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 10:39 AM) Reaper!!! That's the other one i couldn't think of. I have that one taped but won't be able to watch it till this weekend I also have it tivo'd and want to see it. As far as TV reviewers go, I have read numerous ones that said Reaper was the best new show this fall.