Jenksismyhero

Lebron playing up the cramps

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 10:27 PM) HOW WAS DURANT NOT FOULED THERE?! Hater!

That dribble off the leg was huge

There's your bonehead Westbrook play. Lebron with cramps so you iso him and then shoot a 20 foot jumpshot

If Wade had blown that layup he would have flopped and screamed and gotten the call, even if there was no foul.

Lol, James Jones

The Heat are such p*****s. I cant stand the way they play. Lebron getting knocked over by Fisher? Gmafb.

Lol. Great reactions there.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/j...-up-crime-down/

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 09:26 AM) There are going to be choices in any system. We literally can't support the world. But we SHOULD ss2k5! Who cares if we can or not!

Is Barnes projected as a SG or SF?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 01:48 PM) The real problem of course is that there IS no good answer that will satisfy you, because the only answer that will satisfy you is "They're all illegal and therefore they all must be deported". Anything other than that, any policy which remotely acknowledges that we already have 10 million people sitting here in this country is an amnesty and that isn't an option because amnesty is evil. Whether it's paying a fine, filling out an application, etc., any policy which acknowledges that there are 10 million+ people already here and gives any advantage to those 10 million people is an amnesty under your definition of amnesty. You cannot simply pass policy and pretend that there aren't 12-20 million illegal immigrants already in this country. We're spending $20 billion a year now on the Southern border, and despite that, it's taken >8% unemployment to get immigration to settle mostly at that level. Deportations are at record highs, and that hasn't made a dent, and no one is out there praising the President for how much he's ramped up deportation enforcement, because none of it makes a dent. If you try to write a policy which requires all 10 million of them to leave, they're just...not going to leave, and you will continue to have the same problem. If you're going to continue demanding that there be a solution that doesn't acknowledge that overly strict limits to immigration have created a problem on the scale of 10 million+ people, then there can be no solution. So this justifies blanket amnesty? Come on. I'll meet you half way, i've only argued that what he's doing is wrong. Penalties/fines should be mandated. Mandatory deportation from this point forward (even for children), etc. etc. We can't keep saying, "oh think of the kids! make them all legal" and then in 10 years do the same thing. That's not a system for making people utilize the legal process. It's condoning and promoting illegal activity.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 01:57 PM) Ill break down your points because I think you raise some of the classic arguments, and I want to go through them. 1) There is nothing stopping them. That is not true, there is bureaucracy stopping them, there are immigration quotas stopping them. The better example is: "Well officer I wasnt following the speed limit because Toyota only could make a speedometer for every other car, and my car didnt come with one, so I had no idea what the speed limit was. When I went to the store to buy a speedometer, they said that even though they had plenty of them, they legally couldnt sell it to me because they already had sold their quota. So I would have to put in an application for a speedometer and maybe I would get one in the next 2-3 years." 2) People didnt expect those benefits. Im not sure how we can argue this one. Most people who immigrated in the early 20th century are dead. All I can go by is anecdotal evidence that they were trying to escape to a better place. That being said, I work with immigrants (legal and illegal) on a daily basis, not one has ever said that they wanted "free benefits", they all wanted to "escape to a better place". 3) Do you think it was okay for Lincoln to unilaterally declare slaves free? What about slaves that did it the right way, they earned their freedom? Werent they being given the stink finger by Lincoln who unilaterally declared slaves free? My family came here legally. I dont care if all the illegal immigrants are declared legal, that makes more legal immigrants, which you just said isnt a bad thing. So if you can turn something bad, illegal immigrants, into something good, legal immigrants, just by merely waving a wand and saying "And so it shall be done", you wave the wand. You dont sit around worrying that someones feelings might get hurt because they had to work harder. I would expect most illegal immigrants would gladly switch their positions with those legal immigrants who were lucky enough to win the lottery. And I also would expect those legal immigrants would not switch places with illegal immigrants. (1) There's nothing stopping them. You might have to wait in line, but you're not stopped from ever immigrating to this country legally. Is there some universal right to be free to enter a country and demand citizenship at any time? Come on. The rest of the world doesn't operate this way, and neither should we. Speed up the process? Absolutely, i'm 100% in agreement with that. But it's bulls*** to claim people are denied access to this country. That's clearly not true. (2) So people that come over here specifically to have a kid so they can be born as an American citizen are doing it because they like the weather here? GMAB. People come here because it's a better opportunity than at home. Period. And most do so because they know their kids will get a free education and free healthcare that their home country doesn't provide. (3) Couple things: First, Lincoln used his war powers to do that, so unless Obama is going to really stretch the meaning of those powers, that's not applicable; and two, please show me in the Constitution where immigration to this country is a Constitutionally protected right.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 01:08 PM) Legal immigration and illegal immigration are inherently tied. I would guess most immigrants would prefer to live here legally, not illegally. As for "govt wasnt adding those people to the payroll", sure they were. What you are actually arguing is that in the early 20th century there werent as many benefits, therefore adding more people to the payroll wasnt as costly. May or may not be true, but lets just for the sake of argument say that it is true, that todays society spends more per citizen than in the beginning of the 20th century. This is simply an economic issue, and I dont really believe that more legal immigrants would somehow disrupt benefits (I believe more legal immigrants will result in a net increase of tax revenue), but even if it would, you could easily create rules where immigrants do not get full benefits to start, that they have to work X amount of years before the benefits vest. Thus you could have immigrants paying into social security and not even having a promise that they would get a return. Both citizens and immigrants would win in this scenario. Immigrants get to legally live in the US, citizens get someone paying into the benefit pool who has no right to disbursement. I dont think anyone needs it to be equal from day 1, I think most people just want an opportunity. Then do it. There's nothing stopping them. "Well officer, I mean I wanted to follow the speed limit, but it's so much faster to get to my destination going 150mph than 65mph..." Oh, ok. That's acceptable! And yes, I'm arguing there were not as many benefits because people didn't EXPECT those benefits like they do today. That fundamentally changes the entire argument. And of course we're ignoring the main reason we had such an open door policy - a vast wild west that needed to be populated. And again, no one is claiming that LEGAL immigration is a bad thing, so i'm not sure why you keep saying what the benefits of LEGAL immigration are. I agree with you. What I don't agree with is just unilaterally declaring illegal aliens legal. That's condoning legal behavior. That's giving a big stink finger to everyone else who did things the right way and worked hard to get here. Alphadog made a good point about that that no one has addressed yet.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 12:35 PM) What? Are you saying that OKC played badly and the loss wasn't 100% to blame on the refs? How dare you speak such blasphemy! Hey, playing 8 on 5 is tough. Heck, sometimes they were playing 9 on 5.

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 12:30 PM) Which was highly exacerbated by Brooks resting Westbrook for like 5 minutes during the same stretch, and two incredibly stupid fouls on guys shooting 3's. The Thunder did it to themselves. No I know, it wasn't just that. But it did play a part. It just annoys me that we can't watch the best players go at it. It's stupid. The NBA's all about fixing things, so fix it so that superstars are on the court all the time and aren't sitting on the bench because of ticky-tack fouls (see: the Lebron James/Dwayne Wade treatment)

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 12:07 PM) Bingo. The problem is the legal channels are a convoluted mess that a person can be on a waiting list for a decade before they can become a citizen. I agree, and that should be the first problem corrected. Amnesty, however, is not the answer since in 10 years we'll have the same problem.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 11:56 AM) Just in case you forgot what you said: You said it was different in the 20th century because today they get more "free benefits". I disagree with your conclusion, legal immigrants do not get free benefits, therefore there should not be a convoluted nonsensical process to becoming a legal immigrant, that entices people to bypass it and become illegal immigrants. It should be the way it was in the late 19th and early 20th century, before 1930 when the US started to enact isolationism/protectionism laws. .... come on dude. Obviously we're talking about ILLEGAL immigration here. My point was that back in the day we had an open door policy because the government wasn't adding those people onto the government payroll. The entire political and economic structure is different so it's useless to use immigration policies 100 years ago as a comparison. You're right, if everyone were immigrating legally than it should be an open door policy, but that is not reality.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 11:31 AM) I think you are confusing illegal immigrants and legal immigrants. If you are an illegal immigrant, you dont have to pay taxes thus you get FREE assistance. If you are a legal immigrant, you have to pay income tax thus you get the SAME assistance as every other American. So it seems that you would agree every immigrant should be "legal" therefore we can tax them and make sure they are not getting "free" benefits. I also dont think this is the expectation, and I would think many immigrants would gladly give up 1-5 years of assistance to be granted legal immigration. Because this isnt about money, its about keeping unwanted people out. What are you talking about? I'm not confusing anything. If you immigrate to this country, you should do so through the proper legal channels and you should be paying your fair share just like everyone else. That's my point. Of course every immigrant should be legal, that's the whole point.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 10:18 AM) Do you know why some states would do that? Because adding immigration checks to drivers licenses has the unfortunate side effect of making sure that any illegal immigrants who happen to be in that state also go without drivers permits and without car insurance, leading to many more uninsured motorist claims that the rest of the population has to pay for, higher insurance rates, and very angry insurance company lobbyists. This problem does not go away until you deal with it at the national level and acknowledge the demand for these people and the fact that they're already here. Plenty of states say that you can't get a license without an immigration status check. It does nothing. You're right, and dealing with it nationally is making deportation a strict penalty for willfully violating the law. Not this bulls*** amnesty crap Obama is trying to pull.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 10:00 AM) I didn't notice that. WTF. He's IN FRONT of Joey Crawford!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 10:09 AM) So, exactly the effective scenario we have now. Except that in Illinois you can get a driver's license with a canceled check and a school transcript. Nothing about citizenship is required. www.cyberdriveillinois.com/publications/pdf_publications/dsd_x173.pdf

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 09:46 AM) Wait, allowing illegal immigrants to get drivers' licenses isn't going to bring about the end of humanity? No, they wouldn't be allowed to, because getting a drivers license or state ID should include your citizenship status (which would therefor require proof of your citizenship status). Illegals wouldn't be able to get that without providing false documents.

Get ready J4L: the officiating sucked last night (again). That 4th foul on Durant was bulls*** and pretty much guaranteed a Heat victory. Thunder up 6-8, playing good defense, momentum changing and then BOOM. A no-call foul puts Durant on the bench for the remainder of the 3rd and the Thunder lost. I'm so tired of the NBA officiating. In one quarter if you breath on someone it's a foul, the next quarter you have to tackle someone to get a foul called. It's absolutely ludicrous.

The Killing sucked. How convenient all that s*** gets wrapped up in the last 2 weeks. It's not plausible in the slightest that Jaime would kill a girl who overheard people talking about cutting a back room deal to get someone elected. 99.9% chance she has no idea who those people are or who they're talking about or what the significance of the deal they were making would be (even i'm not sure what the big deal is). Also, Rosie hits her head on a floor joist and blood is everywhere. How was that not visible to Linden when she found the ID card the first time she saw it? And why didn't they go after Aimes? He's an accessory. He was right there and lied to the police. Dumb. The worst part was Duck Phillips telling Linden and Holder they did "a real good job." WHAT THE f***? Linden was SUSPENDED half way through and continued to do illegal s***, but good job! Oh, and convenient that the writers created a whole government conspiracy that ended up playing zero part in this whole thing. This show was crap.