NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 27, 2007 -> 09:53 AM) You see, though, no where in here do you see what *I* am doing to try to help the environment, yet, to Al Gore and the liberals, it's "not enough" because I drive an SUV. I recycle (my recycle bin is chuck full every single week), I use those new little lights as my old ones burn out, I take care of my vehicles to make sure they are as efficient as possible. I don't take private jets everywhere, I jump on the big bus in the sky when I need to get somewhere. Is it enough? I'm not judging anyone else, like Al Gore is by telling us "An Inconveinient Truth". Having seen the movie and read some of his stuff, I would say its less judging and more promoting. Seriously, have you seen the movie? Its not fear-mongering, or ordering people to do things. Its quite literally (at the end) a list of things you CAN do to reduce your footprint. Why on earth is this being made out as evil?

Pasted in the posts...

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 27, 2007 -> 08:12 AM) No he's not at all. By purchasing carbon credits all he is doing is reducing the amount available IN AN OPTIONAL PROGRAM. For everyone else who doesn't follow those rules, it doesn't make a damned bit of difference. If they man were actually practicing what he preached he wouldn't own a gigantic energy wasting house. He would bulldose that house, plant a forest preserve, and live in a tiny little place that used as little energy as possible. But hey, he bought Carbon credits so everything is cool, right? Yeah I touched that boy, but hey, I prayed for forgiveness so its all cool. Just like people who rightfully look at people who want to stand up as authority figures on a subject, and preach to people how they should live their lives, people are going to be really interested to see that those people are more than accountable for their actions. Buying your pennance doesn't make a difference. Just because Al was lucky enough to have a grandpa who got rich in the oil business, so he can afford to make movies about things, doesn't mean he can buy his guiltfree sleep. At least not in my eyes. I certainly wouldn't say guilt-free, but I think he's doing what he should. Seriously, I think he's less of a hypocrite than most of us (on this subject). He isn't just buying credits either - he's buying energy from a different source. He's buying renewable energy. Could he have a smaller house? Sure. So could all of us. Look, I like to think of myself as an environmentalist. I donate to the Nature Conservancy, recycle, drive a fuel-efficient car, donate my time to environmental causes on occasion, vote for open space and mass transit initiatives, and I even run a small NFP where we bring newbies out to the wilderness and teach them things like Leave No Trace. I feel pretty good about all of that. But Al Gore does all of those types of things, AND buys green energy (is that even possible with ComEd?), uses solar panels, etc., to reduce his energy footprint. I am pretty sure that puts him in a category beyond me and most people when it comes to environmental causes. Hypocrite means not doing what you preach. He's no saint, but I'd say he's a pretty good parishoner in the church of the environment.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 08:33 AM) I think you need to explain more than that. Not the second part, but why you think Blackhawks is not offensive. Chief Black Hawk is a major figure in Illinois history - more so than the Illini tribe, really. He was among the last resistors in the area. The army eventually tracked him down, chased his band across northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin, and eventually ran them into the Mississippi where most were shot to death trying to cross. So, like the Illini name, the name itself is reverent, not offensive. You don't see some cartoonish feather-headed mascot parading around the ice at half time, do you (admitedly, its been a few years since I've been to a Hawks game).

I'll be at the 3/5 game vs MIL, and I will post pics (like I did last year).

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 27, 2007 -> 06:30 AM) Why should we care? Are you serious? Why wouldn't we care? We get pounded with messages of hypcracy, especially with the members of the Christian right, and they are celebrated by people. We hear about people like Haggard, Swaggart, Bakker, and the like, and they are laughed at and made as examples of what happens when you don't live like you preach. Yet, Al Gore does the same type of thing, and I hear, so what. It reminds me of people slamming the Catholic Church for protecting child molestors, yet accoring to people just like Gore, whose activities are contributing to what according to him could be the destruction of human kind, and yet I am being told it doesn't matter? And don't give me the carbon credits crap, the destructive behavior has already been done. Its just like the priest/child molestor saying they confessed their sins, and asked for forgiveness. It doesn't change what has already been done, and it doesn't reverse their actions. Seriously, I can't believe there isn't more outrage about this. Al Gore has no problem pointing his finger at any other person who fails his litmus test, yet here people are covering for him. I think the point is being missed. I agree we should definitely care, if Gore is being a hypocrite. Except, he's not, according to the facts. He talks about reducing carbon footprint - and he does that. Like him or not, he's simply not being a hypocrite on this one. He's doing exactly what he should be.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 27, 2007 -> 07:47 AM) The whole point is he is a hypocritical douche, and he's getting defended by the likes of you people. Carbon Credits is just a program to make him feel better about leading to HIS so called destruction of the earth - again, HIS definition, not mine. Do I care what he does in his own house? Nope, until he tells me what I'm doing in my house is destroying the earth and he does the same damn thing. He DOESN'T do the same damn thing. This is what is amazing to me - people are falling for the B.S. like that Drudge report. As I said in that thread, and Balta reiterated with more specifics here, he's a lot more green than any of us (probably). He actually practices what he preaches. That makes him the opposite of hypocritical. In fact, if I'm honest with myself, I'm probably more of a hypocrite on this things because I have not more aggresively pursued those options.

QUOTE(mmmmmbeeer @ Feb 27, 2007 -> 04:54 AM) Agreed...and it's not just pot. Drugs are drugs. There are so many important programs that could be funded by the monies spent on the ridiculous "war on drugs". Pull out of Iraq and legalize drugs, suddenly this country has 100's of billions of dollars every year to spend on a myriad of programs as well as putting a few more dollars back in the pockets of taxpayers. But that would mean shrinking government, so we might as well dismiss those ideas. There is a big difference between pot and, say, cocaine. Cocaine creates a dangerous person to society, is highly addictive, and as a general rule tends to ruin people's lives. Pot does none of those things, except for maybe a very small percentage of the time. I'm OK with legalizing pot, but I wouldn't go so far as all drugs.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 06:49 PM) Al Gore is such a douche " Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy. Gore’s mansion, [20-room, eight-bathroom] located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES)." Which, if I recall, they pay extra for because they choose a partial on alternative power. I don't have the link, but this was discussed a few months ago in here I believe.

QUOTE(Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 08:39 AM) Assuming this situation is true I'd have no problem taking the children away from the parents. Why couldn't the state? You're telling me that a family of 12 living off welfare, living in such dire circumstances as you set out, is providing the minimal requirements of a home under the statutory guidelines? I'd also put the parents on a short ass leash to better their situation or they'd lose their federal help. Sorry man, I just don't buy the fact that people get in situations they can't get out of. Borrow money like the rest of us. Take out educational loans. Work a job or two and go to school part time. Or here's a better thought, after your 6th kid, close your f'n legs (which makes me wonder if they're so poor how exactly did they afford to have 10 kids? they're not exactly cheap, especially if you don't have insurance...)! Seriously though, there is PLENTY of aid available to help people in the short-term. I never said that I didn't want to help at all, but social services shouldn't be a lifelong crutch. Also this hypothetical family is extremely rare. Most low-income people are single, some with kids. Most have criminal records. Most have drug problems. So should we just give them a pass for the rest of their life because they have a tough time? I'd prefer to kick them out on the street unless they show that they're actively working towards bettering their lives (or even the lives of others through volunteering). Most low income people have criminal records and drug problems? I'd like to see a source on that, because I think that's a huge stretch.

Just so I can find such things later... source? EDIT: Sorry, meant to be referring to Rock's quoted text.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 07:59 AM) The problem being, what if another tribe found the Seminole offensive? Or anyone for that matter. So what if the Seminole tribe is ok with it. The way it is now, if one person finds it offensive, then it should be done away with. Illini is part of the state name, so I don't think that was ever in real danger. Ute, same thing. One person? You've made quite a leap there. A lot more than one person found the "chief" offensive, including members of what is left of who represents the tribe.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 06:56 AM) Well what about schools with names like the rebels? With the confederate flag in their symbol. There are plenty of other cases that should be examined. I think that's a tougher one in that case. The confederate flag is part of a shared history, for good or for bad. Whereas the U of I did not share any history with the Illini, who were basically wiped out prior to U of I existing.

Consistent doesn't necessarily mean all-or-none about names. For example, I think names like "Illini" or "Utes" are perfectly fine, but I find Chief Illiniwek to be unacceptable (so I think the right decision was made here). Why? Because the name is not an insult, but the chief and its behavior are. So, I'm consistent in my view. Just don't be offensive. If U of I really wanted to keep the chief, all they had to do was work with the tribe(s) and come up with a way for it not to be insulting. If they couldn't make that work, then just don't do it. Of course, I have it easy, being a Cyclone. Can't really offend a weather system. But even that name is inaccurate, really, since a cyclone is just any low pressure system.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 06:22 AM) Ahhh, I found there is a big diffeerence between sex and work. Maybe you're doing it wrong? I think you missed my point. Less time sitting around doing nothing means less violence, and I don't think I need to have been in prison to know that sex there is probably a lot more control-motivated than desire-motivated. Work 'em on tough jobs for a long time every day, and you will see a reduction is some of those things.

I think Letters from Iwo Jima was a far better film than The Departed. But, we had to make Martin feel better. Its unfortunate, because really, he's not such a great director in my view. Probably the most overrated one, though. And Whitaker's performance in Last King of Scotland was truly amazing. Name cachet or not, he deserved it for that performance, which is what it should be about anyway.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 06:08 AM) If we're discussing how to fix the prison system, is it also worth noting how big of a problem prison rape has become in this country? If one were to try to find ways to actually rehab an inmate for doing something wrong, having another inmate violate and rape that inmate seems to be a terrible way to do things. However, despite that, the numbers of how many prisoners are believed to be raped each year are in the tens to hundreds of thousands according to some NGO's, and it seems to just be something that is tolerated by Americans. "Ha, it's part of your punishment!". And on top of the negative situation it creates in terms of the prison environment, it has also helped rapidly fuel the spread of AIDS within prisons, especially among the African American communities. Just something I wanted to toss into the mix. Do people here genuinely think this is something we should just turn a blind eye to? If they were out working 60 hours a week, they would be less likely to be doing this or other stupid things because they have nothing better to do in prison. One could make a looooooooong list of problems in our prisons.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 05:38 AM) Google Prison labor and you'll see the hot bed of controversy. It's a tough decision, with sound reasons on both sides. I really dislike seeing companies with law abiding citizens, even farmers and carpenters, losing jobs so guys whose only qualification is they raped a college student can take that job. And it hasn't been buying from China, it's been building roads, demolition work at the prison, etc. There is always work no one else wants to do, or there isn't money to pay for. Cutting trails in a city park for example, or self-sustaining activities in the prison like others have said.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 05:34 AM) SHE WAS NOT COVERT PEOPLE. http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20070223-104642-1644r.htm I must have missed this story on all the network newscasts too huh 72. But the media is all over the homo evengelist in Colorado. I don't believe I used the word COVERT at all. This sort of "outing" probably happens every so often anyway. The relevant reason for it being such big news is it involved White House officials. And what on earth does "the homo evangelist in Colorado" have to do with this?

Interesting thought, but you'd end up with Lord of the Flies. Not pretty. It would be a disaster. I like Balta's thought better - forced labor. Prison needs more of that. Have the do anything the government needs done. Less sitting around in prison doing nothing, more serving society. If the labor happens to be in harsh conditions in the Aleutians, then hey, so be it. There was one case along these lines years ago. Long story short, a boy from an Indian Reservation in Washington state had commited a crime off the rez, and was complaining about being punished by a society unfairly, and that he'd be treated differently in his own culture, blah blah blah. So this judge called his bluff. He called the elders from that tribe and asked what they thought an appropriate punishment was. So the judge gives the kid two options - jail, or the elders' idea. That idea was basically being given almost no equipment at all, and having to live in the wild on some Alaskan island for a year, alone. I love that story. QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 25, 2007 -> 08:40 PM) Those types of solutions have been used before. Actually living up there for an extended amount of time sounds like fun, and I imagine at least one other soxtalker would agree. A similar trip is on my retirement and life list. Indeed. Sounds pretty awesome to me!

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Feb 25, 2007 -> 03:31 PM) Minors was a girl? No, he was not. He was a male, or at least signed as one in our PM conversations where he gave his name.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Feb 23, 2007 -> 04:37 PM) Someone with a moderate amount of determination and the info provided could easily find out who they are. The fact that they didn't name the names just doesn't cut it. That's some pretty specific stuff. I certainly agree that is a bizarre way to report that information. I think the author is dancing the line successfully by being acceptable in the literal sense, but its poor journalism. But these situations are just not even reasonable comparable. One other thing I didn't mention here, that is a huge difference, is that there are no high-ranking White House officials involved. If anyone actually thinks that the Plame thing wouldn't have been just as highly reported if a Dem was the President, then they have a very short memory. The White House is always a primary target, regardless of party.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 23, 2007 -> 11:10 PM) Well there are TWO options A. STAY forever B. GET the hell OUT Which one do you like? If you pick B, then you agree with about everyone here. The disagreement becomes when. I'll take... C. Make it work where it CAN work. Pull everyone back into Kurdistan, let them set up their independent country like they want to. They are capable of it, they actually like having us there, it would solve the refugee problem in Turkey and Iran by giving them a place to come back to, its a smaller area to be concerned with, there is oil to provide income, we'd be close to the borders with Iran and Syria which can be better secured... its really the best possible solution at this point (its not PERFECT by any means, and there will be issues, but its a world better than the current scenario). Unfortunately, everyone wants to make this thing all or nothing.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Feb 23, 2007 -> 01:23 PM) http://www.townhall.com/columnists/LorieBy...ting_looks_like Will an investigation follow? Don't hold your breath. The MSM is silent again. What bias? Covert agents being outed by the press is o.k. Only when a supposed covert agent who is actually a manager is supposedly outed by a administration official, is it o.k. to cover it on the front pages of all the lib rags and MSNBC. Yeah, that's comparable. 3 PRIVATE CONTRACTORS, were "outed", in the sense that it was revealed they live within a 900 square mile around the airfield mentioned, and that they may or may not enjoy trains or have beards. No name or any other ID. This sort of thing doesn't make the MSM because its a nothing event. Just some columnist trying to say "hey, they did it too", and doing pretty poorly at it.

QUOTE(mreye @ Feb 23, 2007 -> 10:47 AM) If Iraq's not already Vietnam the media will make sure it is by putting crap like this on during the war. Did we not learn anything? Apparently we did. We're figuring out that this thing is a pointless quagmire a lot faster than we did in Vietnam. My question to you is, what do you see in this war that has even the slightest indication that it can end well? There is no positive end game any longer. Unless the administration is willing to scale back and go the Kurdistan route, I see no path that leads to anything positive. Do you?