Chisoxfn

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 3, 2010 -> 08:24 AM) Should Presidents just not leave the country then? I'm sure daily security costs for just sitting in the White House aren't cheap, and the motorcades and plane trips around the US aren't exactly frugal, either. Compare it to the typical presidential travel costs. This administration in general has had far more people traveling with him. A much bigger "entourage" per say and the global costs have been excessive. And personally speaking, If it is going to cost that sort of money to visit various countries than no, I'd put a significant limit on presidential travel. We have this huge deficit and spending 200 million a day to travel to India isn't somewhere high on my list of priorities.

I should note, I'm not saying the republicans wouldn't have done it any different between 2008 and 2010 with that mandate. But what happened happened and a lot of flawed legislation was passed which a decent part of Americans don't agree with in full or have issues with. Why else do we have a 3rd party showing up and to an extent this tea party movement is more a party. Hell, there are varying degrees to what tea partiers stand for. Some consider them an extension of republicans but they also want to make it clear that they have their own thoughts and beliefs and to be frank, some could argue that some of there core beliefs go back to some of the things our country was founded upon (which was small government). The revolution happened for many reasons but by and large my personal belief is in a small government that ensures certain necessities but by and large stays out of your way. Again, all of the above is my complete and utter opinion and nothing more.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 3, 2010 -> 08:37 AM) That is complete B.S. Obama tried that route multiple times and was rebuffed. The lack of cooperation is absolutely a two-way street, and the GOP has just as much blame for it as the Dems or Obama do. Show me where it happened. Show me where any sort of serious discussions happened. The dem's threw a middle finger to the repubs after 2008. They had all the mandate they needed from the voters and could push through whatever they wanted. All the repubs could do is try to block the progress and sit around and do whatever they could to slow the stuff that they didn't believe in from going through. And well, they had little ability to impact or stop it and the bills pushed through are all the evidence I need to support my opinion.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 3, 2010 -> 08:34 AM) Oh my. You need to stop tuning into Rush on the way to work. As far as I'm concerned its the truth. Generalized a bit, certainly, but what I said above is the absolute truth. I'm not saying the republicans would have acted any different in there shoes, but the republicans taking the house is good for America. America works and functions best when there are multiple parties in control and power. While I fully buy into the republican way of thought and republican economic policies I would not state that they acted perfectly over the 2nd 4 year reign that ended in 08. At the same time, I think Obama is one of the worse presidents in our countries history. Just my opinion and you know what they say about opinions

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Nov 3, 2010 -> 07:00 AM) To me, how the Republicans won the house is simple: Do everything you can in your power to completely obstruct the political desires of the opposition (democrats), scream bloody murder that the system is broken (even though you were the ones breaking it), say that if you are elected/re-elected you will fight for real Americans (while being the back pockets of big business), and continue to do everything in your power to completely obstruct the political desires of the opposition to the point where absolutely NO legislation to fix the economy is passed, there by sinking the President, and getting your man (or woman) in there in 2012. See, it's that simple. No, it is as simple as the democrats pushed everything they could through for the past 2 years and never reached out for any sort of olive branch. Obama never had any conversations with the minority republican leaders. It was pretty much an FU given by the democrats to the republicans. They didn't want to work with the repubs and had the power to do so because America had voted them in. Well, that has changed significantly now.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 3, 2010 -> 06:45 AM) WTF? They don't like when their representatives do nothing? This has been one of the most productive Congresses in terms of passing legislation in decades. You have to go back to Johnson's first term to see a Congress that did this many major bills. You can look at it 2 ways. You can either tell me that the Dems totally overreached, or you can tell me that the Dems didn't go nearly far enough, but if people don't like representatives that do nothing, then they'd have loved this Congress. Ya, they've passed legislation that had major holes and it is pretty evident that America wasn't happy with what had been passed for the most part.

If it is anywhere close to 200 million per day I have to ask, why the hell are we paying for him to go there and do that? That is freaking outrageous.

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Nov 2, 2010 -> 10:21 AM) No, they said they were violations of a secondary nature. Which is as good as nothing. no sanctions makes me happy.

excellente!

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Nov 2, 2010 -> 09:42 AM) Iowa recruiting violations? Ha. And NCAA says no problem to Iowa's actions.

I don't think Paul will be back. But I wouldn't bet on that.

Trade Winds is only open during the trade period. Hotstove discussions will always be in palehose

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Nov 1, 2010 -> 10:17 PM) Seriously? You would use the words "very clean" to describe Steve Alford? Let me know what kind of infractions we had under Alford? People can talk about the Pierce incident and debate whether he deserved a second chance or not, but Iowa had zero recruiting violations that I am aware of. Just cause you don't like the guy or something doesn't in any sense shape or form make the program dirty.

That was just a fun game to watch. Deng looked brilliant and was just such an efficient scorer. The guy has the shot to be a consistent efficient scorer on offense and if he can play agressive he'll be a great fit for this offense along with Rose and Boozer (boozer should open up some more mid-range space for Deng). Asik played well, although I was very dissapointed as a whole by our low post defense. Pretty non-existent on Aldridge at times, although at other times, Lamarcus just hit everything, even when contested. Korver did a nice job coming off curls and moving and Bogans did a fantastic job annoying Roy all night. Fun game to watch, especially since Rose had no shot all night. Note: Officiating was freaking terrible. In fact, the refs were the only thing that prevented that from being one of the funnest games I've seen in a long time (just fantastic ball movement on offense and a beautiful up-tempo game). I really really buy into Thibbs.

Texans

I'd take him. I don't think hester is a wide-out so that leaves us with Bennett and Knox as of this point in time (since DA doesn't play much). I want to see what Jay can do with an above average wideout and Moss is still that. Plus it is only for a year.

I'm confused. This stinks cause we have always had a very clean program. Hopefully this won't hinder us. And it seems like a weak violation but still, any violation worries me.

How about not playing in a whole s***load of time could be a reason why he is rusty? If you are telling me he isn't running fast, than say so, but that shouldn't be impacting his average for the most part (outside of legging out a couple infield singles). The reason he isn't hitting for an average probably has a lot to do with rust and a bit to do with the fact that he's going up against more experienced competition at times.

College baseballs have huge seams. It is pretty crazy, to this day whenever I throw with them I end up getting mad blistage action on my finger cause I'm just not used to those sort of seams.

2 terrible picks by Cutler in that game that were just awful. Two picks thanks to our wide-outs not doing there job. Overall, Cutler had an atrocious 4th, but this game was lost when Lovie didn't make that challenge on the goaline. And than Cutler lost it some more with 2 of his picks and Forte with the fumble. Too bad because the dline looked phenomenal.

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Oct 24, 2010 -> 11:27 AM) You need to be more objective lol, Cutler turned the ball over twice in the redzone and one turned into a TD for the other team, despite everything else that went well that quarter it was a disaster for him. No, a TD is what happened when the ball was fumbled. I don't give a s*** what the refs called, it was TD. Case closed. Yes, that one pick sucked, but that isn't a disastrous quarter. We still should have had 7 points in the quarter. That pick 6 was a bad pass, nothing else to it.

QUOTE (fathom @ Oct 24, 2010 -> 11:26 AM) I'm sorry, but blaming that first interception 100% on Hester is so wrong. It was a good ready by Hall, and I'm not completely sure how Hester could have broken up the play. The amount of excuses made for Cutler baffle me. He played a great 2nd quarter and was playing great up until the reviewed Bennett play, but 3 turnovers in a span of 10 plays = disaster in my opinion. I think Aikman knows about 10000% more than you about football and offense and he certainly put it all on Hester.

QUOTE (fathom @ Oct 24, 2010 -> 11:16 AM) Ugh, Cutler with a disasterous 3rd quarter. Dude, you seriously need to open your eyes. If by disasterous, you mean one bad pick in the red zone, a td on a QB sneak (which it was, regardless of the call on the field), and Hester turning an incomplete into a pick, than whatever. Oh and they moved the ball the entire 3rd quarter. So seriously, you need to take a step back before you post this drivel.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Oct 24, 2010 -> 11:02 AM) Ugh...bad decision by Cutler, but Hester as usual just stands there and lets the ball get picked rather then helping out his QB. Bad decision? Hall made a great play that wouldn't have been there if Hester was a wideout.

f***ing hell Hester, how about you help out. Instead you f***ing stand there. You come to the ball and that is either a catch or an incomplete. It should never be a pick.