Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (hitlesswonder @ Feb 22, 2011 -> 02:02 PM) Weber recently talked about how Mike Shaw as a freshman can play major minutes next season with Mike Davis graduating. Griffey would be a returning junior playing the same position...and Weber has already written him out of next season. It seems pretty likely he's gone. Which is a shame, because he is talented -- if Griffey had gone to Wisconsin he'd be a solid Big Ten player. I take that as commentary on the respective abilities of the two coaching staffs. Ugh, again with the hard-on for being anti-Weber/Illinois. Also, Griffey just came in at a s***ty time. He's behind 2 seniors and a blue chip freshman, along with the team often running 3 guards. Wisconsin probably would have been better simply because he would have played limited minutes for 2-3 years and then maybe played a more important role in his last two years. He doesn't have room on this team, regardless of his "talent" (which i think is overrated in comparison to the conference). Edit: Also, you should read more into Weber being high on one of his big recruits. Cuz that NEVER happens in d1 basketball. Ask all those kids at IU who were kicked off the team for the incoming freshman.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 1, 2011 -> 12:28 PM) Honestly, he's monetarily set for life anyway. I highly doubt he was trying to protect his own very small income change. It was pretty clear what happened - he didn't want it, but compromise forced his hand. So the rich never try to increase their wealth? But yes, I agree it was probably less from a self-interested standpoint as it was/is helping the money that got him elected. But the added perk probably helped. And I don't buy that he needed to cave on that issue to compromise. That's yet another issue that the Democrats could have easily won the PR battle on, but they (continually) don't know what the country wants, or don't care to know, and it continues to screw them in the long run.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 1, 2011 -> 11:12 AM) Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich will officially form an exploratory committee regarding running for the 2012 Republican Presidential Nomination. Can't wait for the Dems out there who will flip flop from backing Clinton ("who cares what he does so long as he's effective") to going after Newt ("values? what values can he possibly stand for?").

The acting is pretty good actually, especially from the leads. The problem with the show is that it's not what I expected it to be. It's in the Law and Order mold with one major plot line (going after the Alderman) - every episode has X crime that's amazingly solved/worked on by the same 5-6 cops. Lame. I wanted it to be a character driven show about those 5-6 cops bringing down or trying to bring down a corrupt politician. I don't care for the weekly crime solving. I'll continue to watch with hopes that it's going to get better. It still has it's moments, like the voice overs, and the ending to last night's episode made it a little more "dirty." We'll see. Jury is still out for me.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 1, 2011 -> 08:47 AM) There's still something that doesn't seem right about a Republican attacking Obama for caving in to Republican demands. Conservative, if not libertarian. I also don't agree with most of the current GOP's social policies. But that's why the 2 party system we have sucks. Neither party represents the majority of people.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 1, 2011 -> 07:45 AM) Agreed here, if he's being accurate, that's a good point. Not so much here though - he specifically pushed to NOT have that tax cut anymore for his bracket. I'd say he can own the higher ground on that one. He pushed for a week and then caved without a fight. He doesn't own the high ground on that issue at all. He's like every other politician - in it for himself and the money that put him in office.

Also, this from Obama's statement earlier in the day: is hilarious. Guess you're not doing the right thing, Mr. President.

Point goes to Walker: http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/117101638.html

QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Feb 28, 2011 -> 01:45 PM) I think that's right, but to watch regular season games I believe you also have to purchase MLBtv. After Spring Training, I think the app just gives you pitch-by-pitch, gameday-type imagery. You get radio for both teams, which is the key for me in getting this app every year. It's not blacked out like 670's internet stream, so if I'm not in my car or near a radio (i.e., at work) you can listen to the games.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 25, 2011 -> 03:49 PM) This is worth pointing out: http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/articl...-rachel-maddow/ There is a real budget shortfall projected for Wisconsin, and it is not the result of Walker's tax cuts for the budget in question. I thought only Fox News twisted facts to best fit their message?

QUOTE (SnB @ Feb 25, 2011 -> 04:27 PM) so you pretty much don't watch the white sox? I could absolutely get rid of cable if it weren't for sports.... You get the occasional WCIU, WGN or FOX game. Hopefully ESPN will stream some of the games through xbox live like they do college bball and the nba. But yeah, I rely a lot on the radio or we head to a bar to watch a game. Or I'm there in person. Sports is the huge drawback obviously.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 25, 2011 -> 01:06 PM) Very interested in this endeavor. Keep us posted. What does a decent HDTV antenna cost? I spend a fortune on DirecTV, and while I do watch quite a bit of tv, whether it be sports, or stuff on my DVR, I am very interested in going an alternative route. Would love to hear what your observations ultimately end up being. My wife and I do the same thing. No cable, OTA HD (rabbit ears work fine for us in la grange), netflix and hulu plus and then any series we want to watch we just buy through the ps3. I miss watching White Sox/Bulls games on comcast but that's about it. Certainly better than spending 100 bucks or more a month on a cable package.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 25, 2011 -> 02:42 PM) Welcome to 2002. Wife finally allowed us to quit it this year. Without Simon, I have no interest. Same.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 25, 2011 -> 08:15 AM) Federal Law does not necessarily guarantee every industry/business the right to organize (and a large number of people would be happy if federal law banned Union organizing). In particular, Federal Law does not include any guarantee for public workers to be able to join Unions. Right now, there are This law would effectively do the same thing in Wisconsin. You could join a union, but paying dues are made very hard because you can't have them withheld from paychecks, and the Union has no right to collectively bargain; it's a union that pays for a beer hall or something like that. Come on, let's be honest about it. They can still collectively bargain for wages - the most important element -it's the benefits and working conditions they can't bargain for. The benefits part being what most states are having a hard time paying for this year and into the future.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 25, 2011 -> 08:59 AM) Really, the C's lost to the Nuggets last night? Bulls only 2 games back of them in the loss column, 1 game back of the Heat now. They only had 8 players I think, but still a surprising loss. As for the game, I think this just proves a couple of things. First, Miami is not the elite team everyone thought they would be. Two superstars and an overrated 3rd guy (1-18...that hilarious flop was his biggest contribution to the game) is not enough to win in this league against better TEAMS. Their bench is awful. Except for fast break points, the Bulls basically crushed the Heat in every other significant statistic, and that's with a starting center who still isn't in game shape or in the flow of the game much (aside: thank god Noah is back. He kept the team in the game in the 1st quarter with those offensive rebounds and put backs) Second, the Bulls are one of the handful of teams that can win the title. I'm a firm believer in this. Not next year or in the coming years, but this year. Doesn't mean it's going to happen, but if they play up to their potential they can beat anyone. And that includes this nonsense about needing a 2 guard (they don't). Third, I hate the officiating in NBA basketball (well, college too, but NBA is even worse IMO). The last 10 minutes for the Heat consisted of Wade or Lebron charging through the lane and throwing up a shot to get a foul. It was called nearly every time. For some reason Rose never gets those calls (or at least not as frequently) and it almost cost the Bulls in this game. It makes no sense to me. Fourth, as I said yesterday before the game, Asik is a solid player whose going to increase his trade value for the Bulls, or at the very least become Taj's replacement as the back-up center. He brings energy, he has a knack for finding the ball and rebounding, and he knows how to clog the lane. He's really worked on his defense too. At the beginning of the year he was just a 10 min, 6 foul kind of player. I think he might have had two fouls last night. Very, very solid game for him. Fifth, the playoffs are going to be awesome this year.

Ugh, and the game becomes the 2011 nba....drive into the lane hard, get a bulls*** foul call

Asik proving why hes worth more than lee tonight

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 04:45 PM) I am stunned the Bulls stood pat. If they were willing to ride or die (and they will die, early in the playoffs) with Keith Bogans at two guard because they didn't want to trade Omer Asik, then shame on them even more. I just don't see any way a team as weak at the 2 and 3 as the Bulls can do much in the playoffs. I don't get this logic. He's a good defender, and the way the team is they don't need him to score any more than he's already contributing. Between Bogans, Brewer and Korver they need good defense and 10-12 points a game. If they're expecting more then they aren't a true contender anyway. I think this was an excellent non-move. Give Asik a year or two to develop and he's going to be good trade bait or be a good backup. Plus, in the east this year the frontcourt is going to determine who gets to the Finals, not who has the best 2 guard. Which is why it's puzzling that Boston gave up one of their best bigs for a tweener forward.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 02:24 PM) As far as I know the entire run of the show takes place in Baltimore aside from a few excursions to NJ, NY and Philly (that's just the way David Simon does it, he's immensely familiar with the city). Same characters but there is, of course, fallout for a few people for what went down in season 1 but all the regulars are there. The whole series takes place in baltimore - it highlights (in season order) the police department, the docks, the schools, the mayors office and the newspaper, though the same core group of characters all fit into the story with some new people thrown in. My least favorite was probably season 2 with the docks, but the end of season 2 is fantastic. The show gets better and better, something that almost no other show can say.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 01:45 PM) And I've seen liberals argue that fleeing the state is much different than the filibuster since the rules for quorum are explicitly spelled out in the WISC constitution while the rules for the filibuster are completely arbitrary Senate rules. I don't buy either explanation. Either way, you're using a procedural tactic as a delay. If you're not picking and choosing which things to complain about, then why are we having this discussion? Because i'm pointing out the inconsistency in reaction without setting forth my opinion. I tend to agree that both are bulls*** for what it's worth.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 01:46 PM) Because my brain is so wiped that I read NSA instead of TSA? lol. I thought maybe that was it, but wasn't sure.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 01:34 PM) Just think...if facebook and Google are worth billions of dollars because of the marketing data they can get from your acquaintances and your searches...think about how much money the government can get by selling information about what's in your emails and phone calls. I'm still confused. How does this relate to guns getting through security and/or adding TSA to the list of agencies that need to be cut and/or gutted?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 01:30 PM) Let me put it another way. You guys proved that obstruction without regard to the consequences is a winning electoral strategy. It dominated the last election. I'm happy to give up the Wisc dems. It sucks that they're doing this. You shouldn't have to run away to avoid a bill being passed. The Indiana Dems are demanding something like a dozen bills be pulled, according to one report, I'm not sure on the accuracy of. This is not the way a democracy should run. But if obstruction without regards to the consequences produces electoral gains...f*** it, I'm game. It's clear which side the electoral rewards lie on right now. I'd argue that seeking political asylum in another state is completely different than using the rules to your advantage. But more importantly, my position has never been that Repubs doing this sucks but the Dems doing this is totally justified. That's you guys. You pick and choose when you complain about these things based not on the actions being taken, but purely on the underlying issue at hand.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 01:19 PM) If y'all would like to declare that all parliamentary obstruction tactics are null and void, I'm happy to have your support for Socialized Medicine, a carbon trading system, cutting back fossil fuel subsidies, a $1.5 trillion stimulus that wasn't overloaded with tax breaks, 100+ judges, several hundred executive branch employees, repealing the defense of marriage act, a bill that broke up the big banks, the DREAM act, the employee free choice act, and a campaign finance reform bill. Hell, you know what, I'll trade you the bargaining rights for every teacher and public worker in the country for all of those. Not just Wisconsin. You in? If obstruction is for a progressive issue, it's "zomg! go them! stick it to those old rich white guys in power! they're just evil and corrupt and are only trying to pass X bill because it'll benefit them!" But if it's anything different its "they're ruining our country! This isn't democracy! Man those old rich white guys suck! blah blah" Have some consistency.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 01:15 PM) If we don't know what you're talking about in your phone calls, we can't sell that information and make money off of it. I'm lost.