iamshack

Have an imagination, Mike Tice.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 30, 2012 -> 01:44 PM) Tell me if I'm wrong, but my mind remembers his problem having been the fumbles? I don't remember it being a serious issue, but it may be, because we keep cutting and waiving him and no one else seems to pick him up. Offense has to put up something here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 30, 2012 -> 01:41 PM) Then if you don't have any other option (even Bell for some reason) in short yardage...don't call the Forte dive play. If you need 1 yard, use the QB sneak. If you need 2 yards, call a screen. If you want to put the ball in the RB's hands, call a toss sweep to the outside. I've always liked Bell...he always seems to play well when he gets a chance. I'd love to see them use him more.

QUOTE (South Side Fireworks Man @ Dec 30, 2012 -> 12:49 PM) AJ took out a full page ad in today's Chicago Tribune. What a class act. He will be missed. Yeah, I saw one yesterday on Facebook, too. Really well done and a nice gesture.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 24, 2012 -> 05:39 PM) There was a serious scene where she leans forward on a table and her boobs hang down. I spontaneously said, "Wow!" Then, I realized that I brought my girlfriend with me to the movie. Whoops! Yeah, I agree, but I am sure our girlfriends were ooogling Tom Cruise the whole movie too, so no harm done.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Dec 29, 2012 -> 11:29 AM) Fair point; Scalia has just been the biggest culprit during my lifetime. I mean, I get the same way reading Hugo Black's opinions for classes as I do reading some of Scalia's. Taney was pretty bad, too. I'm removed enough now that I don't really recall many specifics about the particular justices anymore, but I seem to remember thinking Scalia, although disagreeable at times, wrote some pretty convincing arguments. Much better than Clarence Thomas, anyway.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 29, 2012 -> 12:22 PM) Honestly, yes, and I think last year should have shown that. We could have had an extra game or two in the W column with a solid backup IF, maybe more if Robin felt comfortable enough to rest guys. Olmedo is my response there. I get why the bench became so weak last year, because we traded away portions of it to find starters, and that was the sacrifice we had to make after injuries happened. But there's definitely wins that can be found with a deeper bench this year. Yeah, fair enough. I don't think we'll be anywhere close to them this season, however.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 29, 2012 -> 11:18 AM) Seriously, how many backup IF's/utility guys would you not say that about? Probably zero. However, with how far away we are from the Tigers at this point, is our backup or utility infielder's defense prowess really a major concern?

QUOTE (farmteam @ Dec 29, 2012 -> 12:14 PM) I think bmags was talking about no matter how consistent he is letting states decide how to treat gays...Scalia himself is pretty clearly no fan of gays. You quoted one line from Lawrence, but not the one about the "so-called homosexual agenda." That's not exactly reeking of impartiality. Scalia is a really, really smart guy -- as Shack said, he couldn't be a SCOTUS justice if he weren't. But he also comes off as a bitter old man who's angry the times are changing and the rising tide is against him, not with him. More to the point, he comes off as a condescending jerk half the time because he doesn't seem to respect the validity of his opponents, or their arguments. That is like 90% of the SCOTUS justices in our history though...the position was created for some bitter old condescending crusty jerk or jerkette.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 29, 2012 -> 12:14 PM) No offense, but I don't feel like I learned anything from this statistic. It''s Adam Kennedy. I don't need to know any statistics. He sucks.

Jeesh, I am really getting sad.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 29, 2012 -> 08:50 AM) Sean Peyton got paid Five year extension.

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 28, 2012 -> 12:08 AM) The Bears often bring out the worst in Chicagoans. Listening to the Score embodies this perfectly, even most of the personalities on there are caricature versions of our fans. Daaaahhh Beeeaaaarrsssss izzz wuunnnnn fiiiiiiineeee orrrrgggaaannnniiiiiizzzzzaaaaasshhhuuunnn.

QUOTE (The Gooch @ Dec 28, 2012 -> 01:45 PM) I am rooting for the Packers if the Bears win at noon. The only way I can see a real Bears fan not doing so would be if they really want Lovie out. Yeah, I am a bit torn, honestly. I guess I won't be disappointed with either result...if I did have any faith we could win anything this year, I would be really hoping we make it in, but I don't believe much in this offense. In fact, I don't really know how anyone could. So if not making the playoffs ushers in a new regime, that may spare us from another 2-3 years of utter offensive incompetence and may be well-worth it.

I have a hard time believing that AJ did not respect Robin. Half the damn games when we were on offense, AJ was standing next to Robin chatting him up in the dugout. I also find it hard that Hawk could speak of AJ so reverently if he didn't respect Robin, considering how much Hawk respects Robin.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 28, 2012 -> 01:52 PM) I'll paid attention to some supposed decorum about hyperbole once kap stops posting here. It's just a pet peeve of mine...I get the point, but I just think when you go to that level of absolutism, it rises to the level of completely ridiculous. It's the same as saying so and so "sucks at baseball." It just doesn't have any meaning anymore. So why say it? Just my view.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 28, 2012 -> 11:53 AM) You've used that lame line twice in the last few days now. I'm not sure why you're taking my stated opinions as declarations of fact. Do I need to preface everything with a lengthy disclosure that what follows is only an opinion? Because it comes off that way. You may not agree with Scalia, but to say he is "a hack in all fields" is ridiculous. The guy is a Supreme Court justice...you don't reach that position by being "a hack in all fields." When people say dismissive crap like that in such absolute form, it's just over the top ridiculous and pointless.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 28, 2012 -> 10:53 AM) Though snarky, I think this cuts to the heart of the point. I think it's possible the internet accelerates the poor learning behavior jenks is worried about. But that behavior was there prior to the internet. The difference between students regurgitating 50 online sources now, is only different in that they previously regurgitated 10 print sources. American students were trained to do 1 thing, navigate what you need to do to get a good grade. Sometiems the teacher sets this up so they learn a lot, others it sets it up so the student is just hustling in the class. Agreed...I have had classes where the teacher allowed students to regurgitate other sources rather than actually read the work at hand, and then I have had classes where teachers recognized students would do that, and therefore had students arrange all the secondary sources and report on those as well. The schools and the teachers need to adjust to the changing landscape of technology as much as the students do.

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 27, 2012 -> 10:02 PM) Sometimes I'm ashamed to be a Bears fan. ?

Happy Birthday buddy!

QUOTE (farmteam @ Dec 27, 2012 -> 06:49 PM) Hah, definitely. By original primary sources I didn't necessarily going to find the dusty in the copy in the corner of the library -- the original copy of an opinion I can find on WestLaw or LexisNexis is just as good (better, because of all the associated research tools that come with it). Yeah, I guess I didn't think of it that way because doing that wouldn't really occur to me. I don't trust other people with things that are important to me...which is why I have a difficult time working on group projects

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Dec 27, 2012 -> 06:45 PM) That's what we're getting at. I agree with your point, and it seems you agree with what we're saying too. I think we're all on the same page, but it's an interesting conversation. I'm with you on finding information faster and easier, I think there's just two different things we're discussing here. Well, that is where the teachers and the schools need to require a better product out of their students. They should adjust the curriculum so that students can't cheat. Require in-class exams on the book instead of a do-at-home book report.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Dec 27, 2012 -> 05:36 PM) Ah, so are you saying these critical thinking skills could be just as easily (if not better) honed by just reading a novel and analyzing it? Essentially that the secondary research itself doesn't really help with critical thinking skills? If that's what you're saying, I agree to an extent -- but there's still value in learning how to evaluate secondary sources, which is a critical thinking skill in itself. No...I am saying the primary sources are available online usually as well...just in electronic form as opposed to physical form. Many times things are just better organized electronically, because they can be recalled instantaneously. I thought where Jenks was going was to say critical thinking skills develop from having to find the primary sources themselves and go from there as opposed to having the tendency to just read some schmoe's rehashing of the topic that is instantly available on the internet. That is not how I research electronically though if the subject matter is at all import to me. I still try to find the primary sources, still try and arrive at my own conclusions, etc., etc. I guess I see what you guys mean though if you're talking about me doing a book report now and just pulling up some other guy's report and plagiarizing it instead of reading the book myself.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Dec 27, 2012 -> 06:30 PM) I agree. Not necessarily useful for everyday stuff, but for when you really need to actually look at original source material, you're going to benefit by having those critical thinking skills Jenks is talking about. Yeah, I am just not sure there are "critical thinking skills" associated with doing research using primary sources. Research skills, perhaps...but there are also research skills one develops when doing online research. I don't necessarily see what critical skills arise and develop from digging through physical libraries or books that are absent when doing online research.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 27, 2012 -> 06:12 PM) This is a good insight and it makes me think of the next question...does "picking up an encyclopedia" really develop critical thinking skills more than going to Wikipedia/Google? I'd say the answer is probably no. Being able to turn around information on those sources might well be even more useful at developing critical thinking skills, because you're interpreting data more quickly....but either way, critical thinking development is a different tack from having to go to a book. Well this is the point I have been trying to make. I think it is generally exchanging one research methodology for another one, neither necessarily better than the other. Ultimately, I think there is something to be said for returning to the source data of a subject matter sometimes, and anything you are genuinely interested in or that is extremely important to you, I think one would do so. But for every day life, not really.