StrangeSox

QUOTE (YASNY @ Aug 25, 2008 -> 03:52 AM) I hear ya Steff, but as of today who would a better representive of Chicago than MJ? It's usually more about the host nation than the host city, though, right? MJ fits as a national icon AND as a former gold medal-winning Olympian, but if they passed him over for someone else, it wouldn't necessarily have to be a Chicago icon.

Why read yesterday's news in print when you can read the news "as it is happening" on the internets?

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Aug 21, 2008 -> 01:26 PM) "He's a lover, not a fighter. But he's also a fighter so don't get any ideas."

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Aug 21, 2008 -> 12:41 PM) neither was Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. See how well that works? time to put the shoe on the other foot. ...and we're back to garbage politics! Everyone loses!

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Aug 21, 2008 -> 10:10 AM) Not at all...in fact, I'm fully aware of it, but to raise prices and cut benefits is just going to make customers angrier, high fuel cost or not. And the speed at which fares (and gas prices) went up, has consumers surly as it is. And this kind of thing only makes people more surly. What are they supposed to do? Not raise costs to make customers happy and fly every plane at a loss? They are really between a rock and a hard place because flying planes is not cheap.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 20, 2008 -> 04:47 PM) OK, let' see here. So many things in that post i want to get the straight. 1) if we are going to start arguing semantics and conjecture with every damn story that gets posted here, there will be no discussions at all. At some point, we have to, at least for discussions sake, take the story at its word. 2) The story said he was seen walking around with a gun. WHY the officers didn't initially approach him with their guns out, I have no idea. As for the reaction to him moving towards the consol, you must not have been pulled over in a long time, at least not bycops who didn't know you. You always keep your hands where the oficers can see them, ESPECIALLY if you are wearing camo face paint. 3) How much jail time I don't care. the fact he got NONE is what pissed me off. 4) Take your scenerio and put it about 10 years ago, and maybe throw in a few abortion clinic pamphlets and you would be dead wrong that no one would blink. Even if it happened today, if he openly supported abortion killers, the Pro-Choice people and NOW would be on this faster than Homer Simpson on a doughnut. 5) Semantics here again. It doesn't say if they ordered him out of the car before they grabbed his wrist. They grabbed it fearing he was reaching for a weapon. While holding his wrist, they noticed a weapon and then ordered him out, and when he refused, dragged him out. Since he did NOT get jail time, I hope he gave up something good. But his medical career could be alot more difficult now. Assuming the school doesn't kick him out for this, just imagine him trying to get malpractice insurance with these charges on his records. That is one bill I wouldn't want to see. And with people googling doctors nowadays, I wonder how many times his name will pop up with this info when people are checking out the new doc in town! I hope this follows him around forever. Based on the other facts in the story, it seems like the article was poorly written and that they were unaware that he was armed until they saw the gun in the back seat. Why not find another article on the subject, or better yet, the actual court documents? Then we could know for sure.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Aug 20, 2008 -> 10:46 AM) I love it how people defend this piece of crap human being, saying he has all the rights to run around with a loaded AK-47, while supporting terrorist organizations. He doesn't have the right to support terrorist organizations financially, but he does have the right to support them through his words and own an AK-47. We cannot give the government the power to limit who can and can't bear arms based on political or religious ideology. As Soxbadger said, there's probably some information missing from the article that appeared in the court case. It does sound like he was up to no good, but what were they able to prove? Is this sentence out of line with other people charged with similar crimes?

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Aug 19, 2008 -> 11:30 AM) The feeling's mutual. I understand rifles, shotguns, handguns, whatever. A f***ing AK-47? No, that I do not understand. FWIW, the AK-47 he had was the same as any other hunting rifle. Semi-automatic. It just "looks more scary" to people who don't know anything about guns. It wasn't a "machine gun," as its been referred to here.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 19, 2008 -> 09:44 AM) Well Iran and Iraq are Shia, and Bin Ladin is Sunni, right? Nonetheless, they do have a common enemy... and I have a feeling the money networks tend to run together, sects be darned. We've heard this same sort of accusation since about 2002 and have never seen any evidence for it. Maybe when you're dealing with religious fanatics, "enemy of my enemy is my friend" doesn't always work.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Aug 19, 2008 -> 03:01 AM) I don't see why their age matters. It's stupid that they wouldn't allowed to compete because of age in the first place. They agreed to the rules set in place. Simple as that. I think it'd be great if they waited until after the Olympics and then said "oh, wait, you're all 12 or 13. We'll be taking those gold medals back now." Yeah, that tie-breaker made zero sense. I'm guessing they'll be revisiting these new rules.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Aug 18, 2008 -> 06:12 PM) Which is why I called it desperate to say we are evil. That stuff is a long time ago. Plus Iraq was to stop the evil torture that their government was doing. Sometimes you have to meet evil with really nasty. The US did plenty of awful things or supported some pretty awful regimes during the Cold War. Let's not act like this country has always done "the right thing" and has never done evil or supported evil.

Most of Chicago's lakeshore is architecture from the World's Fairs, right? Maybe the Olympics would have the same long-term impacts. I think it would be great for the city and I'd love to see it happen.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Aug 14, 2008 -> 12:59 PM) I'm sure you could have a friend back in Serbia hook up a slingbox or watch the Serbian channel that covers the Olympics through your satellite... since this American media is just so terrible. You know, the American media you digest 24 hours a day. Better shut that TV off right now, actually, because that American media is about to cover this White Sox game. That American Ken Harrelson is such a homer too. Face it, you live in America, the media is going to be biased toward the home country. The only person who can stop the ingestion of the terrible American media is you, by turning off the tv, not logging into soxtalk, not going to American Website... not doing all the American things you like to do in this country. This doesn't mean I love you any less, but I'm tired of you complaining about America in this thread with nothing to back it up. I was in Sandusky, Ohio this past week. It's on Lake Eerie -- pretty close to Canada. There was a Canadian channel broadcasting the Olympics. Now, they were obviously talking about the "home team" a lot more (talking about the great 18th place finish for some Canadian), but the coverage was distinctly different in style. The American broadcast was all about story lines, while the Canadian one seemed to be more about the actual games and performances. I enjoyed the Canadian approach much more than NBC's. As far as complaints about coverage goes, if you've got an HDTV cable/ satellite package, though, you should be able to see some coverage of most of the events. I've seen badminton, equestrian, handball, waterpolo, shooting, and many others I'm sure I'm forgetting on various channels.

QUOTE (Chet Lemon @ Aug 13, 2008 -> 01:39 PM) I was speaking to corporations that "reported trillions of dollars in sales" per GAO's estimate, while making these sales over the last eight years, and then paying NO Federal Income Taxes. That, which was described by the article. Companies escaping the payment of taxes specifically due to depreciation, operating losses, or because of tax credits were not in the wrong. Sales are not profit.

QUOTE (Chet Lemon @ Aug 13, 2008 -> 12:45 PM) Who pays the people who defend your freedom? Who pays the service men and women in our communities to recruit civilians in order to provide for the common defense? The Federal Government. Article I of the Constitution vests Congress with the power to “raise and support” military forces to “provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." Where does Congress get the power to “raise and support” our military? Federal dollars. Unless compulsatory service becomes policy, dodging these necessary payments weakens the ability of of the armed forces to attract men and women who have the skills needed for the Nation’s defense. No, I probably won't walk away from my belief that it is treasonous not to pay one's share over an eight-year period as alleged in the report. Your share is determined by the extremely complicated tax code (my dad just started working for the IRS, and you should see the several-hundred page manual they have just for filing inter-office paperwork!) These companies weren't doing anything illegal. They didn't pay taxes because they either didn't make money (when was the last time GM was profitable?) or had enough tax credits. How about the many small businesses that barely turn any profit or turn zero profit once the employee salaries are paid? Is it treason to run your business in the most efficient economic manner? And if there's one budget that isn't hurting, its the Armed Forces.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Aug 13, 2008 -> 11:46 AM) I was just coming here to post this. arms are not supposed to do that.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Aug 13, 2008 -> 08:57 AM) I thought she was 18? I dunno But we'll excel on the track as usual. I dont think China has nearly as many medal candidates there. Nope, just turned 16 this year.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Aug 13, 2008 -> 06:54 AM) I wouldnt say Shawn Johnson looks 12...she has a young looking face but thats a bit of a stretch. Eh, maybe I've just lost my gauge for what 16 year old girls look like. The US had the opportunity to step slightly ahead of the Chinese on the balance beam, but they just couldn't capitalize. They looked completely shaken after that. 18 of the US's 27 medals have come from swimming so far. We're ahead overall, but we've got a bunch of Bronze medals and the Chinese have a 17-10 advantage in golds. I have no idea how many more medals each country is going to realistically be competing for, though.

QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 09:30 PM) Nothing at all. It's just cool to know that we have arguably the best athletes in every sport (except soccer, tennis, etc.). But like you said, you could make an argument for Ovechkin and Pujols. We have the best athletes in every sport except those really major ones that we don't. Those Chinese athletes looked WAY younger than 16. Then again, Shawn Johnson looks like she's 12, too, so maybe they're just really young looking?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 05:08 PM) In theory. It's got some gaping holes in it though. Plus they talk about setting it at 17% which I just don't think is realistic, especially considering the massive dropoff in revenue from the top. Give it a few years and Cook County will be at 17%!

QUOTE (Texsox @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 02:48 PM) The point I was starting at is thus. The closer we get to one tax per person, the simpler things are. As it is now, we pay income tax, sales tax, property tax, tolls on roads, sin taxes, etc. etc. then we start creating things (corporations) so we can tax them too. Taxing a corporation is basically grouping us up to pay another tax. I use to believe the fairest way hypothetically to fund the government is to divide the cost like a restaurant bill. Here's the cost divided evenly between everyone between 25 and 75 years of age. But I now realize that the poorest taxpayers would be paying a much higher percentage of their income then someone with more resources. I also realize if we tried to have everyone pay the same price, and it was based off the poorest person, we would not be building an America we would enjoy living in. So the garduated income tax program is the fairest that provides an America we want to live in with world class roads, military, etc. But wouldn't it be grand if we could stop there? No other taxes. There's also the idea of the "fair tax." From what I understand of it, its essentially a flat sales tax rate on all items and a certain chunk of income (say first $25k) is exempted because those are 'necessary' costs like food and housing. You'd get that money back in the form of a monthly refund check to cover sales tax on basic needs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_tax

What about the line of thought that goes "companies don't really pay any taxes, they just collect them from their customers and pass them on to Uncle Sam"?

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_...a?urn=nfl,99790

QUOTE (Texsox @ Aug 11, 2008 -> 12:58 PM) I have argued that following the speed limit is the best course of action. I know. You haven't made any argument for why the current speed limits are good ones, though, which is what this whole argument is about. Great. Setting low speed limits does nothing to change this. Well, its a good thing that I haven't (and nor has anyone else, I think) argued at adjusting speeds based solely on how fast everyone drives. That is brought up just to show that when you set an arbitarirly low speed limit (ie one that isn't based on traffic flow, density, site lines, road conditions, etc), people aren't going to follow it. It's a bad restriction in that case. BUT WHAT IF YOU GET CUTOFF?!?!?! ON NO'S! That just makes my point. When there was a national 55 MPH limit, you'd be forced to go 70 MPH there. Why? It was completely arbitrary. In some places, 55 is reasonable (you couldn't go faster on 90/94 in Chicago if you wanted, and I actually think its 45 MPH in the city itself). In other places (traffic density on the new I-355 extension is practically non-existant), it is ridiculous. If you do 65 or 70 in that stretch, you'll get cars blowing by you. You're right. More time to react is better, as are shorter stopping distances. However, when the speed is more uniform, there's just less to react to, so you end up about evening out. Well, the only data we have shows that increasing speed limits does not increase accident and injury rates. These studies look at pretty short time lines, not the several decades it would take for brand-new technology to be a dominating factor. I never said that! Great!

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Aug 11, 2008 -> 11:53 AM) So unbelievable that we're seeing this thread for a guy who originally was slated to not make the team. In a sense was behind Owens, Anderson and Alexei for outfield time. It sucks for him personally, but Owens injury was the best thing that happened to this team this year. Who knows how long it would have taken to get Quentin into the starting lineup if Owens started the year out there.