Jenksismyhero

It's so depressing I can only laugh. It was a good run of hope for a few years. Now we got a bunch of aging players and no superstars. 7 or 8th seed and a s***ty draft pick here we come!!

Wow Maryland, why would you storm the court?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Feb 15, 2015 -> 07:11 AM) I have no love lost for most "modern" unions. They loved the era in which they could force huge fees and levy massive minimum number of hours worked coupled with high overtime wages (think McCormick Center and other examples like it), until they chased off all the business they were fleecing for years with stuff such as having to hire 50 electricians for a minimum of 4 hours of work when they only needed 1 electrician for 15 minutes of work. Or when they implemented ridiculous rules and regulations preventing regular people from being able to plug a power cable into a power receptical because only an "official union contractor" could perform such an action. They brought a lot of this anti-union sentiment on themselves, and anyone that's ever had to deal with this sort of nonsense knows exactly what I'm talking about. Unions, for all the good they once did, have become a corrupted version of what they were meant to be and by and large are no longer necessary as states/federal worker rights now exist. If we could do away with all the rules/regulations that artificially inflate the cost of hiring a union worker, and the corruption at the top of the union, they'd have a place in my mind again, but until then, and in their current forms, they can go die. +1000000000.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 05:28 PM) So he is still a Christian, then would you say that Christians are committing those crimes? If you decide that God is telling you to kill all non Christians, is that considered a Christian act? If someone seeks revenge and kills in cold blood a murder and justifies it as an eye for an eye, are they doing it because they are a Christian or they are evil/mentally ill/ etc.? And if he did make the statements as you want, how will that help end terrorism? The argument against is it causes some Muslims to fee, offended by the US and radicalizes more of them. Even if that is not true, how will saying that Muslims are using terrorism against non Muslims going to stop the violence? He's a Christian. He's also an extremist/psychotic one with a warped and distorted understanding of Christian ideology. Not sure why this is so complicated. Obama isn't forced to label ISIS members broadly as just Muslims. He can say they're extremists, terrorists, etc. And you're still not getting it. I want Obama to state the facts regarding their motive. E.g., like today, ISIS kidnapped 90-100 Assyrian Christians. It wasn't a "random" kidnapping. It was clearly deliberate. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/24/...N0LS0MH20150224

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 10:28 AM) He's really stupid and boring, but I thought at least he would keep one of the stunners around. I dont find either one of the remaining girls attractive at all. I don't think either are unattractive, but for a show like the Bachelor neither are what I would be hoping for going in, that's for sure. But again, that was the whole season. Not many, if any, were drop dead gorgeous.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:58 AM) Is that close to Arlington Iowa? Because it seemed like his town was in the middle of nowhere. My wife looked it up (because she's weird) and that town is at least an hour, hour and a half from any mid size city that would have a hospital. I think it's 2-3 hours to Des Moines and about 2 hours to Iowa City.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:35 AM) Because no beautiful girl would ever move to rural Iowa, unless she was married to the Univ. of Iowa or ISU head basketball or football coach...like Andy Enfield at USC. Just kidding. I was reading somewhere that the current bachelor was a millionaire, but I'm assuming that was mostly based on the value of his farmland? From what I understand, one of the best-looking girls was in Playboy and only seemed interested in using the show for promoting herself (surprise, surprise). At any rate, the Chicago girl could work at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, so she SHOULD be the favorite. She wasn't all that attractive and she screamed trailer-park trash. Plus how can you marry someone that the world has seen naked? And not just boobs naked, full frontal, legs spread naked. From the beginning there were maybe 2 really attractive girls. And they went home pretty quickly.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:28 AM) The Bachelor has officially eliminated the good looking girls from his show and now is focused on two girls that may actually be open to moving to Iowa. Riveting stuff. I got sucked into watching this season with my wife. It's so incredibly boring. The guy has the same amount of personality as a chair. Whitney might be a catch, but man that voice would get to you after a while...

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 04:24 PM) That just doesn't seem right to me. If Gacy said he killed all those boys because it is the Christian thing to do and he's a Christian, we'd call it a Christian killing? When you have a billion people on one side and a thousands on the other, it just doesn't compute with me. I still like Bush's message, we are against evil, not Islam. That has carried forward to Obama. I don't know, but we've probably have nothing left to explore with the topic. In the end it is the action we can take that will mean more than the rhetoric that surrounds it. If he prayed to God and followed the major tenants and practices of the religion and just used some twisted reading to justify his acts, I don't see how that stops him from being a Christian. At what point do you stop being Christian? By doing a single act against Christian teaching? That'd knock a LOT of people out.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 02:22 PM) No matter how far they distort and twist the religion? Yes. I think that's a matter of practice, not affiliation. And given what a lot of Muslims do in the name of their religion that we may fine distorted or twisted (treatment of women, punishments, etc) doesn't mean they're any less Muslim. I doubt you could come up with a clear definition for any religious group if you're going to hold them to some strict standard of practice. There are all sorts of variations out there. Some people ignore a lot of what's in the Bible/Quran, others don't. ISIS follows the Quran to the extreme. They're still following it though. And again, I don't really care if Obama calls them an Islamic group or not. I was criticizing him more for not stating their motive, which is to kill all non-"Muslims."

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 11:10 AM) I think if you spliced together every fight and zombie kill in the Walking Dead into one continuous stream, jenks would think it was the greatest piece of cinema in the world I don't know if I'd go that far, but it would be more entertaining!

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 22, 2015 -> 05:57 AM) This I mostly agree with. Have you considered that once something is so distorted and twisted it ceases to remain something? Even if the President's statements contain the words distorted and twisted the American people hear "these people are distorting and twisting the Muslim religion to meet their own agenda". Perhaps that is a reason why not to label them Muslim or paint this as a Muslim against all others battle. There are hundreds of millions of Muslims in the world and a very tiny percentage distort and twist their religion to the point of committing acts of terrorism. Adding that label to the terrorist description fuels anti-Muslim sentiment around the globe and fuels the anti-American fire. It's along the same lines as why I dislike hate crime laws. Who cares why, it happened and needs to be dealt with. If you want continuity between these two crimes I'd rather drop the motive from the domestic matters. Cops are killing people, perhaps unnecessarily in cases. That should be enough. So if that's true - that the American people are dumb enough to be duped by difficult words and will only hear the Muslim part of his statement - why isn't that same concern present when a crazy person kills three other people and the President says crimes against people of color/different religions isn't acceptable? It's the same problem - you're feeding the trolls, in one case anti-muslim trolls, in the other the every-white-person-is-racist-and-hates-all-none-whites trolls. Also, I think this viewpoint ignores reality. They ARE Muslim. And they purport to follow Islam, to the T. I actually agree with Mahr when he says that while it might not be THE factor, it's certainly A factor here. I think the American people, and people of the world, are smart enough to know that not all Muslims want to kill you for not being Muslim, just like not all Christians hate gays, not all Christians want to bomb abortion clinics, not all Christians believe praying to God will cause rain, etc. I don't agree with your second statement. I think when someone targets another specifically because of their race, that amps up the crime. It's akin to pre-meditated vs. in the moment. You should account for that extra level. I do think it's ofter overused with whites and underused with minorities though.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Feb 22, 2015 -> 10:35 PM) I'm surprised the Walking Dead is already starting the Alexandria Safe Zone story line. Depending on how they handle this arc they will catch up to the comics within the next couple of seasons. The first two episodes this half-season were pretty meh IMO, too depressing and slow. But last night's was pretty good. Anytime they have a 10 minute action scene and they add a new character it's going to be good. If it's the standard group moping around it's nearly unwatchable. Other TV: what the hell Black Sails? Really? Such a forced, unnecessary dynamic.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 09:18 AM) The point guard is almost always the release in those late shot clock situations. If somebody on the wing is bottled up under 10 seconds left, the pass is back to the top of the key for a reversal (assuming there isn't a post feed available - and on this team, there isn't). Likewise, Tate is always going to be the open man there because teams aren't trying to deny him the ball. So if the options are (1) forced shot; (2) turnover; and (3) pass to Tate and hope, you pass to Tate and hope... That's the problem with Tate generally. Unless he becomes at worst a 25% 3 point shooter, he's a career backup at best. Also of note, I was 100% sure Nunn's three was going in with 38 seconds left. Wednesday just became a lot, lot more important... need to win @ Iowa City. I've seen Hill be more successful with his contested old-man, H-O-R-S-E shots than Tate with an open look. I'd take my chances with Hill, no question.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 08:01 AM) Rice out 8 weeks-ish due to a broken wrist, still extremely rusty from that Cosby is off the team after suspension and just a horrific season Nunn took longer to recover from offseason knee injury I would say those have contributed just a tad to that record. The big thing is he's either super passive or super aggressive. Nothing in between. An entire offensive possession will go by and he doesn't touch the ball, or if he does, it's a simple hand-off, or he's a ball hog and drives to the lane and takes a contested shot. He needs to try and set guys up more. The defense collapses around him, we have good shooters, why isn't that the offense instead of this garbage, toilet bowl offense they run (i.e., nothing). Also, there were about 5 trips where Tate is holding the ball with 5-6 seconds left in the shot clock. That's moronic. I'd bench guys, especially Nunn, Hill and Rice, for ever giving up the ball to Tate with that much time on the clock. I'd rather you take a fall away contested three than give the ball to Tate with the pressure to do something with the ball.

2 of 16 from three. Pathetic.

Jesus. This game is unwatchable. Thanks refs. Let them play football the 1st half. And now tag

Just awful on offense.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 02:14 PM) Obviously we disagree that the response should be the same. I believe every situation is unique, even two different shootings here, or two different terrorist events. I think a "we always do this when this happens" is a poor policy. Would you apply the same strategy to every criminal case you take on? Always have the same opening? I believe each situation should be evaluated for the best possible solution. That doesn't seem to fit with a process that starts with -- well we have to do this because we always do that -- no matter if we think it will help or not. Now if you want to debate if the approach being used is the best possible approach we are probably closer in agreement than disagreement. If your point is our approach on domestic hate crimes is working and we should also apply it to international terrorism, that's a different debate. If neither approach is working, why should we duplicate it? The responses don't have to be exactly the same, but when it comes to expressing to the American people and world your disgust/condemnation, I don't see why leaving out motive when it comes to terrorists is a bad thing. Everyone knows they're a religious based group even if it's a distorted and twisted version of one. Hell, express that in the same statement as you explain how the targets were not random but intended based on religious beliefs. It'd be one thing if we didn't know who committed the crimes or why and were just guessing that it must have been wacko Muslims. But that's not the case here. And it's not a legal case. There are no sides. EVERYONE (with sanity) agrees that these acts were terrible and should not have happened. EVERYONE (with sanity) agrees that targeting people based on their skin color, beliefs, backgrounds, etc. is terrible. Couching the response is unnecessary when everyone is on the same side.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 12:07 PM) Aaron Cosby no longer with the Illinois basketball program. What an incredible disappointment. Two years of proven production at a major conference including a really strong sophomore year and he was horrible this year and didn't even make it through the season. Good riddance. edit:

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 11:15 AM) Having two different strategies in dealing with international terrorism and domestic issues is ludicrous? I would think that treating each and every issue in the same manner no matter the circumstances would be ludicrous. Different people involved, different solutions available, citizens versus terrorist groups, etc all seem to lead to a different handling. They both involve hate crimes and race or religion, something that we don't condone in either situation. Our response should be the same - world, these targeted attacks are not acceptable and we condone them. No one should be targeted for who they are, what they look like or who they pray to.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 07:04 PM) Think of it like the NCAA Tournament. ISIS/ISIL wants to establish credibility, they're a bubble or mid-major team. The only way they can do that is by being perceived as "beating" or at least confronting the US directly. The difference is we don't want to give them an opportunity to play. It's the same reason that the University of Illinois has no advantage in scheduling SIU, Illinois State, etc. If you beat them, it's expected by everyone. If they upset you somehow, it's a disaster. And everyone likes to root for the underdog to take out the big bully team, the Dukes in bb or Alabamas in fb. If we "take the ball away" like Lucy with Charlie Brown, refuse to offer them what they want in terms of anti-Islamic sentiment...in other words, we simply will not acknowledge they're a real power or on anything approaching equal footing to the established superpowers that lead the UN/G8, then what is the effect? They obviously need "victories" and they need allies/financial assistance. Here's an article about how China is pivoting towards Afghanistan/Kabul/Pakistan with the U.S. pullout. http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2015-0...nt_19621445.htm Too late man. They play. They kill people, in various places. The real analogy here would be the U of I pretending like SIU doesn't have a basketball program at all, despite the fact that they play on ESPN and the world can watch them.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 04:55 PM) You not liking the response of "Isis wants themselves to be viewed as #1 the Muslim resistance to the west and so adding the religious element to any of these discussions furthers their recruiting goals" doesn't mean that no one has told you what the legitimate reason is. Isis wants everyone in the middle east to view this as them standing up to the (Christian) bullies in the west. Al Qaeda wanted the exact same thing. There's a reason why - it's the best way to recruit disaffected fighters, give them an enemy that is attacking their religion and keeping them oppressed. Hell, even our "allies" in the region play the same game. Adding the religious element???? THEY SPOUT IT THEMSELVES. It's not some secret. How on earth is the United States stating facts - that ISIS targeted and killed non-Muslims - going to change the message to the people they want to recruit? "Oh, well you see Mohammed, the US says it was random acts of violence SO CLEARLY ISIS ISN'T DOING WELL IN THEIR HOLY WAR. Guess I won't sign up after all!" For f***'s sake guys, that is so moronic. And no, the rest of the world doesn't. France came out specifically and said they would protect Jews against these sorts of targeted attacks. They weren't playing stupid word games that make zero sense.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 03:44 PM) For two whole days, then he issued a clear statement in an editorial on Wednesday. Yes, he did come out and clarify. But that's still not much of an explanation for why he didn't do it in the first place or why he thinks it's good policy to react in that way.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 03:23 PM) I almost always tip 10% for take out. Why? Who gets that extra 10%? You're just picking up your food.