NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 16, 2012 -> 03:43 PM) I don't entirely disagree with what you're saying here, but I think downplaying this as a fringe belief is mistaken. For a horrifying look at the reality of such laws, here's one woman's experience in Texas: http://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2012/0...works-in-texas/ I am not saying it is fringe. I am saying that it has surged, and is now dwindling.

QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 16, 2012 -> 04:12 PM) So you don't have to be smart to play at St. Bonnies What mean you?

Bonnies up 6 at the half on FSU.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Mar 16, 2012 -> 01:01 PM) I think Texas eventually got the message, after about the worst 12 minutes of basketball in tourney history. Yeah no kidding, they are now within 3 points. 5:11 left to play.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 16, 2012 -> 12:02 PM) Oklahoma passed a similar bill over the veto of the governor. Arizona is considering similar legislation. Virginia has their recent terrible law. Nebraska (iirc) has a lengthy waiting period law. Since the 2010 election, there's been an unprecedented attack on abortion access and women's health. Note that this was only mid-way through 2011 and the pace has not let up. And those are some pretty socially conservative states. That said, in many states that are not deep south or Oklahoma, watch what happens in the 2012 elections. The Republicans had a nice election in 2010, but have overreached all over the place, and that will hurt them in a lot of states that aren't in that category. Places like Oklahoma are just ass-backwards and will be that way for a long time. Which sucks for people living there.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 16, 2012 -> 11:54 AM) That's f***ed. Society is regressing. Not all of society. Just the people in the evangelistic, religious right. The ones who have decided that freedom is a bad thing. They hold a lot of sway right now in some states, but fortunately, they are going to be routed out in November.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Mar 16, 2012 -> 08:51 AM) Anyone else really intrigued by the 1-16's and 2-15's today? Detroit, LIU, Vermont and Lehigh are all better than their seeds. I'm actually insanely interested in the MSU-LIU game, I think that game is going to be extremely close... I've been seriously tempted to pick Detroit.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Mar 16, 2012 -> 07:41 AM) And New Mexico beat a very good LBSU team, not overrated, UNLV just played awful. Also, Colorado came in with a hot hand, whereas UNLV was upset on their home turf during their conf tourney.

So out of 16 games on day 1, only 2 were upsets by seeding: Colorado (11) and VCU (12). But Syracuse, Louisville, UNM and sorta Baylor got scares. Fun day.

Colorado hangs on by a thread for the win.

QUOTE (SleepyWhiteSox @ Mar 15, 2012 -> 11:35 PM) I care about everyone's brackets. The board has 20 people in a bracket contest. Its tournament time. Deal with it.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 15, 2012 -> 11:19 PM) Seems like usually, if I have more than one pool or sheet, where I make a few different picks... the losses get spread out and neither sheet ends up that good. Today, assuming Colorado hangs on, I have one sheet (the Soxtalk one) where I will be 10 for 16, and another (at work) where I will be 15 for 16. The work pool has actual money involved, so I'm not complaining. Speaking of jinxing... Never count your bracket points before they hatch!

Seems like usually, if I have more than one pool or sheet, where I make a few different picks... the losses get spread out and neither sheet ends up that good. Today, assuming Colorado hangs on, I have one sheet (the Soxtalk one) where I will be 10 for 16, and another (at work) where I will be 15 for 16. The work pool has actual money involved, so I'm not complaining.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Mar 15, 2012 -> 11:09 PM) If there was ever a game where a 15+ lead could be blown in under 11 minutes its going to be this UNLV- Colorado game. Colorado looks terrible and tired. They're only winning because someone referred to UNLV as a "lock" earlier in this thread. Jinx worked.

QUOTE (Rex Hudler @ Mar 15, 2012 -> 03:42 PM) Are you watching a tube TV with rabbit ears?? How in the hell could you not have TBS? For some reason I thought only 2 networks were carrying games, not 4, as I found out later in the day.

Ho. Lee. s***. Iowa. State.

UNM v LBSU about to start. That was a tough game to pick, should be fun to watch. Hopefully it will be showing on TV here, but I doubt it.

I did some reading on Montana, even picked them to beat Wiscy in one of my pools. I thought they'd make a better showing than they did.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 15, 2012 -> 02:17 PM) We disagree. I think using percentages in this manner skews the actual numbers...and makes really large leaps look small in comparison. We agree, however, that congress is responsible, not the President(s). Another reason that graph is useless. In the 80's, average budgets were around 666 billion. Today, they are around 3.7 trillion. Tacking 200 billion onto 666 billion would result in a higher % than tacking on 200 billion to 3.7 trillion is my point, even when inflation adjusted. It's a common and easy way to play with numbers...they use it in the stock market all the time. While the word trillion has been totally watered down the last few years, that's a HUGE change in spending, and I'm not blaming Obama or the current administration any more or less than the previous one(s). Our budgets are growing massively, and they all promise to stop the bleeding...only to make it even worse than the guy/gal before them. They'll talk about tax loopholes, tax reform, and whatever else...and none of it happens. Also, let me add that it's ok to spend 5 trillion dollars when you take in 5 trillion dollars. It's not the numbers that bother me when it comes to budgets, it's how they simply ignore the word budget and spend whatever they want anyway. I particularly like your last, bolded part there. The funny thing is, some of the true liberals like Kucinich have said before they want balanced budgets, but they want to balance it in a way that includes raising taxes. Republicans want to balance by cutting government. However, the Republicans don't actually make any real cuts, even when given the chance. And they make things worse by cutting taxes, which is absurd when the government is running such huge deficits. The liberals, on the other hand, can't raise taxes because it isn't politically viable.

Halftime: UNC-Asheville 34, Syracuse 30 Syracuse 1-for-13 from 3-point land, shooting about 38% from the floor total.

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Mar 15, 2012 -> 03:09 PM) Syracuse-UNC Asheville just entered "intriguing" territory. Very real possibility of a 16 seed having a halftime lead. 31-27 with a little over a minute to go in the first half. Does anyone have UNC-Asheville winning this game?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 15, 2012 -> 02:04 PM) Using percentages when it comes to this is sneaky and underhanded, even when inflation adjusted. For example, when you have a budget of 50 billion and spend more than that, the % will be way higher based on the smaller numbers, than say...Obama tacking on a few hundred billion to a trillion. A nicer example: If you have 10$, and spend 20$, you just raise the deficit by 100%. But if you have 1 trillion and spend 1.1 trillion, you raised it by only 10%. BUUUUUT, 100 billion dollars is a LOT more than 10 dollars...even if you adjust for 30 years of inflation. Bad. Um, the federal budget has not changed on the order of $50B to $3T, or even close to that. And in fact, I think looking at percentages is one good way to analyze it (but not the only one). Yes, adding $100B is different now than in the 90's. But it isn't 1,000 times different. And if you properly adjust for inflation, it is a pretty solid measure. I don't think anyone is saying that Obama (or really any of these guys) is particularly good at cutting government spending. What it does say in those numbers though, is that the narrative that Dem Presidents tend to spend a lot more than GOP Presidents is basically false. But here is the kicker... what that graph really DOES say, that I've said before, is that you reallu have to look at Congress a lot more than the President to see who spends more or less, and taxes more or less.

That was the first time I got to watch Murray State. Their guard play is impressive, and their frenetic zone defense really put CSU on their heels.

Axelrod and Stewart to pitch. Audition for long reliever slot, and/or person to take over for Floyd if he is traded.

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Mar 15, 2012 -> 10:30 AM) If ISU hits their threes, they likely win. If they don't, they likely won't. Pretty simple for that game. It's better for Iowa State if Royce White ends with 10 points and 8 assists than 20 points and 2 assists. It is strength vs weakness in this game. ISU is one of the most prolific 3-point shooting teams in the country, and UConn is terrible at defending on the perimeter. UConn is big and strong inside, and the Cyclones don't have a true big man to counter with.