iamshack

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 04:04 PM) haha, and in turn, see how quickly you jumped on me for my one sentence. Sure, but then again, I wasn't the one accusing you of anything, was I? See how passionate people get about this? And for what?

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 04:02 PM) people that are religious. lol Hah. I thought so, but this gets all so confusing... I'm not intolerant towards religious people. I'm intolerant towards idiots who are behaving in an idiotic way because of their religious beliefs. Unfortunately, it seems to me that a lot of the idiots out there are behaving idiotically because of their religious beliefs.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 03:57 PM) In fact, I think the fanatics are the more rare case. There is a VERY LOUD majority in many religions. But, for the most part, I think people practice individually. I don't know that for sure, but I think that's more the case. And don't use a sports message board and its posters as your measuring stick. I think you're probably correct in that most people who practice religion are not running around harming other people. But there is also a lot of subconscious intolerance that occurs on a day-to-day basis, just like there is an awful lot of subconscious racism and sexism going on a day-to-day basis.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 03:59 PM) I was suggesting that you, iamshack, may be intolerant. In the same sentence, I claimed you seemed to stereotype people. I'm intolerant towards what, is what I'm asking you? I am intolerant to people who are religious intolerants, or to people who are religious?

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 03:52 PM) Well, your response to "I have absolutely no problem with people who practice those religions in a way that doesn't affect, bully or harm others and their ideals." was that you think most religious people bully and harm others with their ideals. sounds like intolerant stereotyping to me. I don't believe in organized religion, at all, so this isn't really something that offends me. Still, I'm not going to make claims that most of them are out to bully and harm other people. Are they annoying sometimes? yea What does "intolerant stereotyping" mean? Is that stereotyping of people who are intolerant towards those who believe in other religions, or is that stereotyping of people who are religious as intolerant? I don't mind people who go about their beliefs in a way which does not affect others. But unfortunately, as I was trying to convey in my initial post on the topic, this isn't the case nearly enough. Perhaps I should have said that rather than use the term "rarely."

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 03:15 PM) you just don't get it, do you. yes, it is ok for iamshack and people like him to bully his ideals on everyone....why? he is righteous and enlightened, he has EARNED the right to be intolerant. Where are you getting this? I'm not sure how this response even came out of my post...

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 02:44 PM) really? can you even pick up the brush that you just used to paint that generalization? Ok, so let me ask you this question...if it is such a HUGE generalization, why do you jump down my throat about it so quickly? Within minutes of me posting that, I've got two posters jumping down my throat for making such a huge generalization...Hmm....these people would never be intolerant of another viewpoint... Do you see how quickly you jumped on me just for one sentence? Let's face it, people are extremely passionate about religious beliefs, and it doesn't help that many religions preach something to the effect that "those who don't participate in this religion will go to Hell." So then the followers of that religion are running around preaching intolerance because they have been ingrained with this artificial supremacy. And just for your personal delight, Sox4lifeinPA, I do not fit into what you describe as a typically religious intolerant person. I've gone to Catholic schools almost my entire life. I attended an all-boys prep school where most of our instructors were members of the clergy. So the opinions I have formed over the years certainly were not formed from attending 1 or 2 Sunday school classes, being involved in a cult, or from having no substantial physical exposure to religion. But it's sort of difficult to look upon a number of institutions and organizations favorably that have been either directly or indirectly responsible for so much death, devastation, misery, and outright evil that institutions of religion have throughout human history. And then to have to watch so many people have the nerve to actually attempt to force their beliefs on others through pressured indoctrination or even absolute force is downright laughable to me. Sorry if you don't agree, but our daily lives are filled with evidence of this nonsense on a consistent basis.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 12:59 PM) The issue isn't respect for religion itself, it's respect for the people that practice that religion. Personally, I don't care for religion, I think in many cases it's too much of a dividing force between people who ultimately believe the same ideals. But, I have absolutely no problem with people who practice those religions in a way that doesn't affect, bully or harm others and their ideals. That is very rarely the case, unfortunately...

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 12:08 AM) Quatros is absolutely delicious and for some reason I've only had it twice my whole time down here. Well eat it while you can! I miss Quattros and Wise Guys badly. You'll miss it when you're gone....

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Feb 4, 2008 -> 08:15 PM) I actually remember that piece about Henderson's base stealing, it was written by James Click. The entire point of the article was to evaluate what impact Ricky Henderson's base stealing had on the 1982 A's offensive production because even though he stole 130 bases that year his success rate was only 75%. The conclusion was that Ricky's 130 stolen bases only had a positive impact of a little over 1 run that season because he was also caught stealing 42 times. I think that might be where the 75% rule came from (or just an example of how the rule holds true), if a base runner steals bases at a 75% success rate he's actually right around the break even point value wise. Of what can be quantified statistically.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Feb 4, 2008 -> 07:55 PM) I really liked the La Bambas at SIU. I like it a lot more than the one at U of I and downtown. That was delicious stuff. I think you were probably just more drunk down at SIU...

Why the no food after 9 pm or 10 pm or whatever? I hear that theory is bs...can anyone explain to me why it's not? As for the diets...be careful how hard you go on yourself at first. Work your way into it. If you go from eating like crap to suddenly cutting out EVERYTHING, you'll just go back and binge on all that stuff eventually and ruin all the hard work and suffering you've put yourself through. Make small changes to your diet- but make them permanent. The best thing to remember is probably just "everything in moderation."

QUOTE(lvjeremylv @ Feb 4, 2008 -> 07:04 PM) So you're trying to tell me that of the 130 stolen bases, or the countless times he advanced to 3rd on a sharp single, or scored from 1st on a double when other players would have pulled up at 3rd, or managed to stay out of a double play by beating the throw to 2nd, he only scored (when he otherwise would not have) once every 30 games? Please. All these simulation and "what would have happened if..." and "what about when..." so-called stats are ridiculous and nobody should give them a second thought. Somehow a simulation model of something that happened 25 years ago becomes accepted as fact, and it's absurd. Edit: And incidentally, I just looked up a SB-by-SB account of that season, and he stole home twice. So I guess other than that, his baserunning only added 3 runs? LOL. Nice "conclusion". I was too young to really realize the impact Rickey had on games in the beginning of his career, but to hear Hawk and DJ talk about him in his prime, they make him sound like the best offensive player in the league. I have a really hard time believing what BP said as well, especially considering all the things that happened because pitchers were so worried about him- whether that was during his at bat, while he was on base, or in their pitches to batters while he was on base. I really think he probably had a hand in a lot more runs that those 5.

QUOTE(knightni @ Feb 4, 2008 -> 07:42 PM) Along with a bucket and directions to the bathroom. Honestly, I usually do regret having eaten it the next day...but it's soooo good going down....

QUOTE(The Critic @ Feb 4, 2008 -> 07:25 PM) My cousin lives in Mokena, so I take Harlem to 191st and turn right when I go to visit him. I've been past that mall many times, but have never stopped to shop there. Yeah, that's it. It's a nice little shopping center- they have a Best Buy, Dick's Sporting Goods, Super Target, a taco bell, arby's, fridays, and a "Boston Pizza" or something. And apparently, unfortunately, a Lane Bryant. I wonder if I will ever be able to go there again and think of it the same way....probably not..

Oh, and one more thing. Anyone ever been to "The Diner" on Irving Park Road on the Northside for "the slinger"? You start with toast, followed by two all-beef hamburger patties, topped with two fried eggs, a couple of hefty helpings of chili, followed by plenty of hash browns....Wow, that is a huge late night delicacy....and if you finish it, you even get a certificate saying you finished the Slinger!

QUOTE(SnB @ Feb 4, 2008 -> 02:01 PM) La bamba is nowhere near classy, like in another dimension from classy. Still tasty from time to time though I think some La Bamba's are better than others...the one in Lincoln Park is outstanding...the one down at SIU was not especially great. I tend to think the key is whether they have the white cheese (mmm) or the yellow cheese. I was not allowed into the La Bamba my last year at SIU because my roommate would always ask for mustard on his burrito (which of course they didn't have) to piss them off. Finally, they banned us both from coming. Speaking of SIU though, boy, do I miss Quattros pizza and Wise Guys subs. I might have to make a trip to the alma mater just for those two late-night delicacies... And one more thing...my roommate I mentioned previously was of hispanic heritage. We would come home from the bars and he would scramble eggs and cook up some chorizo and we would have breakfast burritos at 4 am....unbelievable...I think that was the best part of living with that guy...

QUOTE(The Critic @ Feb 4, 2008 -> 06:39 PM) I saw it on 3 or 4 listings when I Googled it. Probably multiples of the same original story. I think Brookside is right - I knew I heard a different name, but I couldn't remember it or find it in any reports. Yeah, I don't know what the Irving-Plaza thing is. This place is at the corner of 191st and Harlem. I live at the corner of 183rd and Harlem, so it's right down the street. It's called Brookside Marketplace or something like that. If you're driving down I-80 East you can see it on your right just as you are approaching the Harlem South exit.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Feb 3, 2008 -> 01:33 AM) So lets say I had my car running outside (while I was in the house to grab something) and some schmoe walked up and got in the car (nowhere did they have to force anything) and just drove off. Would that not be theft? Yeah, that is theft. I don't understand where these guys are coming from with their definition or elements of theft. I've never really heard this "use of force" requirement before.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Feb 3, 2008 -> 12:40 AM) So someone could steal my wallet if I had it sitting on a table I'm near and if they didn't force it from me or my hands they wouldn't be charged. Thats pretty freaking pathetic to me. Those girls should have at least spent a night in some sort of cell. Since when are those the elements of theft? Seems a bit odd to me... The following is a basic definition of theft: A criminal act in which property belonging to another is taken without that person's consent. I'd have to review my criminal law notes, but it seems like the standard used by the police in this case is a little odd...

I was actually in that strip mall as the police first began pulling in. My roommate and I were going to the SuperTarget there to buy food for our Super Bowl party. Right as we were coming towards the entrance to the strip mall, an Oak Forest police car roared up and started blocking the entrance. We went around to another entrance, parked the car, and started walking to the Target. We were actually the first customers denied entry to the store. A policeman was there with a Target manager, and the manager stated that there was "something going on in the area and they were told they could no longer let anyone in or out of the store." As we were walking back to the car, squads from Oak Forest, Matteson, Orland Park, Cook County Sheriff's Police, State Police, and unmarked cars were flying in. A group of ambulances had gathered near Lane Bryant. I figured they were just parking there because that was an empty area of the parking lot. As we were walking back to the car, a woman was approaching Target, and we told her that they weren't letting anyone in or out. She said that she had just dropped her husband off at Best Buy, and she had tried to go to Lane Bryant, but they weren't letting anyone in. She must have missed the shooting by 10 minutes, as the 911 call came in at 10:44 and this was no later than 10:55. We then left and drove to the Tinley Park Jewel, but as we were en route, there were police cars from all the neighboring communities flying by, and choppers coming in. It was crazy. Apparently this guy may have entered the Target after the shooting incident, in search of a change of clothes. Pretty scary to think that we were so close to being there at the same time....

Honestly, mentioning Ron Paul and Jesus in the same sentence is just too much for me to handle.... This guy and his supporters are ridiculously humorous to me.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Feb 1, 2008 -> 03:29 PM) I have nothing else to add to a conversation about whether or not Brian Anderson is, or ever has been, right up there with the greatest defensive centerfielders in the history of the game. Well you're the one who decided to play Devil's Advocate...

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Feb 1, 2008 -> 02:31 PM) Anderson's good in CF but he's no better than hundreds of guys who have been very good in CF. And since you played Devil's Advocate with me, I will play it with you... This is according to what? 1) What you've seen with your eyes of Anderson, in conjunction with what you've seen with your eyes regarding "hundreds of guys who have been very good in CF"? and 2) Your ability to somehow arrange and rank, in your mind, Anderson and these "hundreds of other guys who have been very good in CF" into some form of hierarchy of overall defensive skill?

QUOTE(AssHatSoxFan @ Feb 1, 2008 -> 02:33 PM) just for everyone Ben and Desmond CANNOT be part of the Oceanic 6 since they were never on the plane to begin with I would think we know of 4. Kate, Jack, Hurley and Sawyer. That basically leaves Claire, Locke, Jin, and Sun as the other main characters who were on the flight. Which ones die or don't return? My guess is Locke does not leave the island. I guess it could also be Kate, Jack, Hurley, Sawyer, Claire and Aaron (Claire's baby)?