NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 31, 2011 -> 11:54 AM) Like shaping the modern presidency? I didn't say he wasn't important - just that I think others were more so. He had a framework to function within, that he had very little input into building.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 31, 2011 -> 08:59 AM) Governor Perry appears to have made something of a fairly bizarre speech performance in New Hampshire last Friday. Here's some video. It's also not just the editing...one of the attendees, Manchester NH's Mayor, commented that "It was different". What the... Drunk is definitely one possibility. I also wonder, if as his campaign is flagging, he's looking to try for a different image to get more attention. Trying to go a little more off the cuff, be more Cain-like.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 31, 2011 -> 08:11 AM) Well there doesn't seem to be any contention that he did throw it down the stairs and then shot it. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/local-bre...t-incident.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/crime-sce...hot-parrot.html Yeah. And if the situation is as the police report suggests, where they couldn't get it under control and it has already attacked, and was a danger to the crowd, and had bit multiple officers... then isolating it and giving it a choice seems like the only reasonable path to me. Sounds awful, but I'd like to hear other suggestions as to what could have been done. Point is, I find the originally posted story laughable, as it creates the idea that some cop just walked up to a dog that wasn't doing anything wrong, decided to subdue it and kill it, for apparently no reason. Why would that happen? It makes zero sense. But also, I am saying that what is in the police report may not be accurate either, even if it is more believable on its face. And the idea that the reaction to this should be "I hope he dies of AIDS" disgusts me, and quite frankly is pushing the boundary of acceptable conduct for this forum.

Tough call between John Adams, James Madison and Ben Franklin. Hard to compare them really, as they were such different animals, but all so crucial to making it work. Washington was a natural leader more so than any of those, but he was also far from a brilliant strategist. He was a tactician, and his input into the way the country was established, other than his military record, was less than stellar IMO.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 30, 2011 -> 09:01 AM) Hopefully that piece of s*** dies of AIDS. QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 30, 2011 -> 09:52 AM) apparently that incident occurred a year ago, here's the police report for the other perspective Nice snap judgment, sqwert. What if the police report is accurate? If the dog was a danger in a crowd and couldn't be controlled enough to wait for a vet tech, what were they supposed to do? Sit there and let it bite them, or other people? Of course, the likelihood here is that neither the police report, nor the story you responded to, are truly accurate - the truth is somewhere between. Though I have to say, the police report scenario seems a little more believable to me than the idea that a cop walks up to a dog for no reason, that wasn't harming anyone, subdues it, then throws it down some stairs and executes it. But hey yeah, this cop should die of AIDS. That's classy.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 30, 2011 -> 05:32 PM) Am I wrong, or could Mitch Daniels enter this race tomorrow and have the nomination locked up by March? He'd miss filing in some key states and be way, way, way behind in fundraising and building any sort of ground game. By the time his organization got its wheels under it, we'd have completed 4 or 5 states' worth of primaries.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 01:14 PM) Moving on to my panel interview for the feds Look confident. Don't over-answer. Good luck.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 04:59 PM) My point as well. 50 people died from 2001-2009 from the use of tasers, cited by the DOJ so likely very conservative in #. That's quite high. I think that's quite low. How many hundreds of thousands of times, or maybe millions, have those been used by police over a decade? And look at the alternatives... they may have used batons, or CS/OC, or forced physical restraint, or even a gun, depending on the circumstances. That pool of other toys, combined, would probably have killed more than 50, especially if a gun was used instead at any significant percentage. Keep in mind that tasers have been used in situations that, sometimes, leave only a gun as an alternative.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 04:04 PM) At a high enough velocity to fracture an unarmored soldier's skull in multiple places. I thought that was a rubber bullet. But I suppose depending on the launching weapon, that might happen, I don't really know. QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 04:09 PM) If you launch missiles into crowds, you will hit people with them. If you launch a metal canister with a chemical agent inside, it will be launched with a greater force than one can throw a bottle. There is no way you can claim that missiles that also disperse chemical agents are less force than missiles that do not. You have to understand here, that tear gas, regardless of delivery vehicle, is considered a lower level of force than any type of missle whose purpose is as a missle. This is the way police training is done, and it is the way the court system has acknowledged it. Maybe that is wrong, but that is the way it has been. QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 04:11 PM) For the sake of argument, let's say two bottles are thrown at police in riot gear from an otherwise peaceful crowd not showing any signs of aggression. Is firing or throwing a dozen tear gas canisters into that crowd an appropriate response? IMO, yes. The number of cannisters is irrelevant - you use the number you need to, to disperse the crowd. Number of cannisters is a silly argument.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 03:33 PM) The chemical agent is delivered via missile. Which is intended to disperse, not hit them.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 01:25 PM) Throwing bottles at police in riot gear is a higher use of force than launching chemical rounds into a largely peaceful group? Absolutely it is. A missile (thrown object) is higher on the force scale than a chemical agent like CS. But even if they are the same, it still makes it a reasonable level of force.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 01:13 PM) Not possible. (Yes, I know these were NG's) You are the only one saying it is not possible.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 01:13 PM) Thank you. Thrown bottles by a few people still doesn't justify the police response. Also the possibility of agent provocateurs, which we know were used at the Pittsburgh G-whatever protests a few years ago. Actually, I'd say bottles being thrown from the crowd defintely justifies chemical response. In fact it is a lower level of force than is being exerted by the protestors in that scenario.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 01:01 PM) I will go anywhere that will hire me. I'm currently limiting myself to "This continent." Flying to Oregon for this one. Others I know I'll be applying at are Baylor, Purdue (shudder), Toronto, Arkansas. So yeah, moderately eclectic set of locations. I know the honcho geologist at UNM, if you want a contact. We aren't good buddies or anything, but I've spoken to him a few times before. Fascinating dude. Also, I'd be so very jealous about Oregon. Its one of my 8 remaining states I haven't visited, but something tells me it would be perfect.

Y2HH is right by the way, that it usually takes just a few people in a large crowd to change the timbre of things really, really quickly. Like, in seconds. This is also true, though less so due to training, for police. QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 12:57 PM) So many policeman have been killed at protests in this country. I could see why they would feel threatened by mostly college kids. You are seriously saying it is OK for protestors to be violent, because cops aren't often killed responding to them? If so, then don't complain when the police use non-lethal force that only occasionally kills people in response to illegal acts.

QUOTE (Cali @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 12:37 PM) You kinda just made my point for me. I want a manager who is champing at the bit to take the job, Robin seemed tentative at best, which is fine, but then just don't take the job. And certainly don't tell people in interviews and press conferences that you had to be talked into it. Doesn't inspire much confidence. And yes I would have preferred someone with more experience and more interest in taking over the manager position. There were better options. I have absolutely zero doubt in my mind that Dave Martinez and Sandy Alomar will have better managerial careers than Robin if only for the fact that I think they will manage way longer than Robin. I have my doubts Robin even lasts the 3 years he's been given, and if by some miracle he makes it all three years I wouldn't be shocked if he resigned instead of signing an extension. Zero doubt? Come on now. You really think anyone can say for sure that he won't be good, or for sure that he will be? You can't know that, at all. Which is true of any candidate who hadn't managed a team before, including Martinez and Alomar.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 12:05 PM) I thought it all got changed with the US Cellular deal negotiations? Wasn't there some sort of agreement over how to spend extra incomes because of this? Apparently not. That would likely only be related to the money specifically coming from that sponsorship.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 12:09 PM) I was thinking covered bridges in Wisconsin. Indiana and Iowa are more known for those. Madison County (as in Bridges Over) is in Iowa, not Wisconsin.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 12:36 PM) Job interview the first, scheduled!!! What schools are you looking at, if you don't mind my asking? Just curious what your list looks like, and what end of the earth you may end up occupying.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 12:46 PM) I wonder if the police would ever do something like this to a tea party protest? The Tea Party protests were not of the same nature. There are definitely similarities, but none of them tried to "occupy" anything, and that is the key difference here. I can't believe I am defending the Tea Party, but in this case, I am. The idea that somehow lefty protestors are more likely to be violent is a joke, as the opposite is probably true. But it IS true that this particular movement has much more often chosen illegal methods of protest (mostly about trespassing and traffic obstruction and what not), than the Tea Party ones have.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 11:36 AM) The people who wrote this contract probably did so back in the early 90's. Correct. The contract was heavily favoring the Sox because the state was trying to keep them around. They got a sweet deal as a result.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 11:09 AM) I just said you could make the argument, didn't say it would be a good one Though I do think that since Iraq produces about 2 times the the amount of oil per day as Libya, with a much higher overall capacity, Saddam could have inflicted some massive economic damage if still in power. Obviously that was not as big of a danger in 2001 as it is today, but i'd imagine defending those oil fields was an objective and an important consideration for the future. Iraq has to sell oil to survive. He had no choice but to continue producing it, just to barely skate by. If he had tried to hold back production, he would have created his own civil war, OPEC would increase production to compensate and penalize Iraq, and basically, he loses on that proposition.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 10:40 AM) Of course you could argue the long term benefits and specifically the particular interests of the West in Iraq were much, much larger. I'd argue the opposite. On the list of countries that posed a threat to the US at the time that war started, Iraq wouldn't have cracked the Top 10. Neither would Libya though. There were very few benefits of invading Iraq. The main goal of BushCo in that war was two-fold... 1. to bring the War on Terror to a central location to be fought militarily, and they realized that Afghanistan wasn't going to work well enough that way. And 2. The neo-con idea that they could somehow change the terrain in the Middle East by creating a nexus of democracy in action. #1 didn't really work, since AQ and other groups still operated all over the globe, and in fact were simply given more reason to exist in Iraq. And #2 is a disgusting example of the OPPOSITE of what conservatives are supposed to stand for... plus it didn't work either, because they had no plan for state building, so after 10 years you might maybe have a Democratic Iraq, but that certainly hasn't caused anything positive in the region.

I just want to use this article to say again its really too bad Huntsman has no real shot. He's in denial about his need to do fundraisers in NH, where he is basically putting his entire campaign on the line. I'd have to think he'll change his tune on that, or else he's just not dealing with reality. But apart from that, I really like the guy.

QUOTE (Cali @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 06:32 PM) Bingo. If Robin Ventura had interest in managing at any point in his life, he would have spent the last few years searching for a minor league gig in any capacity. With the Sox or Mets, Hell even Oklahoma St. I'm sorry but this still makes no sense at all. IF he was talked into it, then he was talked into it. Its not like they drugged him and made him sign a contract. He also said he wanted to do this eventually, just seemed shocked at the timing. He didn't not want the job, he just was taken aback it happened so soon, and needed to discuss it with people - as anyone would. If you want to say you preferred someone with more experience, I totally get that. But to say he didn't want the job is manifestly false, since he took it.