Jenksismyhero

Personally it depends on what kind of experience we're talking about. Rumsfield has 40 years of experience working in Washington in a variety of executive and legislative positions, but I think we can all agree he'd be a scary president. Whereas someone like Obama, imo, has little to no relevant experience. I think timing is everything. With out current system I really think someone new with a fresh approach might be good. Even though I think I dislike just about every policy stance of Obama, I really like that he's new and could be a breath of fresh air. Course, I thought the same thing back in 2000, and I think Bush has made the old-mans club aspect of Washington even stronger.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 11:38 AM) Me. 2k's been very straightforward with the fact that last year's game was not close to their goal and this years will be way better. I don't want to get too excited because every year they say this. Last year they took the step of adding more than 10 paths the ball could fly. I couldn't stand that in the 06 version. Hopefully this year they fix some of the other issues, which to me is fielding. I always felt like I was perfoming the action a half a second after I pressed the button. It made everything seem sluggish. It's really a shame that the MVP series can't come back. Does anyone know when that license with 2k ends? I'd easily drop $100 on MVP 05 upgraded with next gen graphics.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 11:42 AM) Yeah, that's pretty much true. But I'd contend that is only partially their fault. Part of the blame for that lies with the media and their lack of focus, as well as a population in this country that is blissfully ignorant of the political process. Those factors encourage the sound byte culture we see and hear. Yip, which is why we've been hearing nothing but the spat between Hillary and Obama, and not much with the actual meat of the debates. It's sad, but thats what happens when entertainment value trumps newsworthiness (in terms of viewership). Anyone interested in this exact issue should check out the last season of The Wire. It pretty much sums up the state of the news and journalism business these days. Anyone else notice the complete drop-off of Edwards? I mean I never thought he had a chance, but the debate the other night cracked me up, where he said something like, "Hello guys, there is a third candidate in this race."

Ok seriously the Bill Clinton did good with the economy stuff has to stop. It's become like Lock Ness or Big Foot in mythical size. Bill Clinton was handed, on a freakin silver platter, the Internet. He did nothing to help the Internet, he did nothing to promote the Internet. He was handed a brand spanking new billion dollar market. Of course the economy is going to flurish. And even that's not true because year 6, 7 and 8 of his presidency the economy was going downhill. I think Bush and his evil regime should be given ten times the credit for how well they've kept the economy going not only after inheriting the internet bubble bust, but also 9/11. But anyways... I think Balta pointed out what I was getting at. It's not as if Bill is giving speechs saying "Hillary is great, trust me, I know because she's my wife and I've spent the last XX years from law school to now witnessing how great of a leader she is/could be a president." Instead it's "oh my God everyone look at me! Ok look at me! Are you looking at me? Ok. Obama said Reagan was the best president ever! Can you believe it?! I know right? The best? Pssh, he must be a closet Republican. boooooo! Don't vote for him!" To me all it does it tell the American people that Hillary isn't good enough to run on her own and be her own person. Again, it'd be different in Bill was used correctly, but he's not. With his antics he's actually stealing headlines that should be Hillarys. That has to hurt, especially right now when she's got a tight race with Obama for the nomination.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2008 -> 12:38 PM) All I'll add again is...take your time. With the markets dropping, this probably won't be the last rate cut before this is over. And right now, this is the definition of a buyer's market. If you can't get a home you like for the price you want with the mortgage you like, wait a couple weeks and see what happens. Wouldn't you be able to refinance your mortgage? I don't know if a bank will want to rewrite it 2 weeks after you sign, but they would 6 months or a year later. I don't see how that will hurt a ton, unless we're talking 2-3%, which the Feds can't possible do. NPR this morning said analysts are expecting another .5% on top of the .75% decrease that just went through this morning. Sizable, but not too significant. I'm in the same boat though. We're looking to buy come next April when our lease is done. Our problem is I gotta find an attorney job here pretty quick before my massive loan payments begin. But we're hoping to find something soon. Our 2k a month rent is ridiculous, even for Wrigleyville. And for the buy now/wait convo - isn't a lot of that the higher end homes? I mean, if he's looking at the 200k range, isn't that usually safe? You might lose 5-10k, maybe 15k, but that's nothing compared to the 2-300k+ the morons (yes morons for buying such property) in California are losing.

lol, aight aight, I'll change it.

This could be in the primaries thread, so Mods feel free to move/delete. After the last couple of weeks dueling words with Obama over MLK Jr. and now Reagan, it seems to me that Bill is just becoming a mockery in his attempt to campaign for Hillary. To me instead of helping her, it's got to be hurting her campaign. How do people not look at the two of them and think, "Gee, Hillary apparently can't speak for herself. She needs to have Bill do it for her." What does everyone else think? And don't fall asleep in public!

lol, exactly.

I'll make a few comments since I'm a pseudo-regular poster about Illinois: I don't believe Illinios-Indiana is an intense rivarly, but one that has always been on the brink of being a good one. Henson and Knight had a lot of classic battles back in the late 80's. It was a decent rivarly back then. The problem was the rivalry didn't gain any momentum. Illinois went into the tank in the early 90's. Indiana hasn't done anthing special in 20 years (save for the one nc season). Anytime a team goes in the tank or just becomes average, it's hard to keep up the rivalry. See the Missouri-Illiniois rivarly in basketball. What used to be great, 3 OT style games, is now usually routs or sloppy games. I think the Gordon thing sparked something new. But I think what will keep it being a good rivalry is that both programs won't be crappy or average. They'll be contenders with some history of one coach being a scum-bag and the other not having the sense to see what was going on and go for plan B. To Rex's comments about Illinois having annoying fans that b**** about officiating, all I gotta say is "please." That's every fan base in the country. I'll agree that Illinois has a ridiculously strong internet following, one that lacks much reason and logic, but you make it sound like they are the worst in the country. They compromise probably 5% of "fans." They're emotional enough to get off their asses, go to the computer, and write something on a message board. Of the 4-5 Illinois fans on this board in particular, I've never seen anyone complain or be illogical about their opinions. If you want annoying fans, check out Kansas fans. Talk about thinking they're entitled. I still never understood why they considered themselves an elite school. When was your last NC? 88? Aren't you like 2-5 over the last 80 years? Please.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Jan 15, 2008 -> 12:28 PM) I'm still taking recruits for my World of Warcraft private server. Play for free! x2 the gold and item drops new post-blizzard content WoW Wednesday nights. What does this mean? How do you get a private server? And how do you play for free? I haven't played WoW in a good 3-4 months but might jump back in.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Jan 13, 2008 -> 05:42 PM) Not to stir the pot here, but I believe somebody in this thread predicted a second-place Big Ten finish for U of I. Yeah that was me. Who blows you away in the Big Ten? Illinois, the worst shooting team, played Wisky close and nearly beat Indiana, both on the road. I figured that a) after 3 years Randle would learn how to play basketball, instead he's the same player, B) after 3 years Pruitt would learn how to pass the ball, instead he's the same player, c) I figured the team could hit some free throws and d) i figured the combo of meachum, holdren, mccamey and alexandar (alexandar especially) could hit some jump shots. I don't think any of those expectations were unreasonable. And today's game pretty much proved that Indiana is not a great team.

Wow, so many things to say about that game. For anyone who thinks Weber can't coach, re-watch this game. His plan was perfect. If only the two biggest morons on the team (Randle and Pruitt) showed some patience and senior/veteran decision making in the last 5 minutes, this would have been a win. How worthless is Sampson? Did he even try to get Gordon the ball on set plays? A ball screen? That's all you've got? And you have one of the worst shooting teams in the nation, and you play zone like three times? Anyone could see that the success Illinois had against the zone (i think two baskets) were lucky ones - how often is meachum going to drive right under the hoop? He's terrible. He made zero adjustments. He relied on Ratliff draining ridiculous three point shots to win this game. IU fans are real classy with the shut up Weber chant - shocker there. In the end I'm happy. I expected Illinois to get blown out. Honestly it reminds me of the Indiana game in 04, when Deron, Dee and Luther finally saw what the motion offense could do. I think the last two games, two of the toughest on the schedule, will go a long way in helping this team grow.

they've done a good job against Gordon. This was the team I was expecting. A team that can play good D, hit a few shots and MAKE SOME F'N FREE THROWS.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 10, 2008 -> 09:54 AM) Of course, the scenario you mention here, and that slippery slope, could just as easily happen in private insurance as public. I'd argue it already has, and for good reason. In the last 6 months I had to drop my health benefits because I started working part time as a law clerk. I looked into getting my own insurance which, suprisingly, wasn't a whole lot more expensive per month than what I was paying at my full-time job (like 40-50 bucks more). Most companies required a physical and a declaration of certain activities, like smoking and heavy drinking, each of which would raise the cost of the policy. They also could raise the cost if you had any pre-conditions. To the cost of our health care system question, does anyone know of a study that actually looks at the impact of R+D costs? I guess I just don't see how getting treatment is all that expensive when you consider everything involved (I have family thats in the industry, so my viewpoint is probably biased). Sure it seems ridiculous that surgeries can cost tens of thousands of dollars, but when you think about everything involved in the process, the doctors, nurses, and equipment necessary, it's got to be somewhat reasonable. And I guess I don't know any numbers, but intuitively it seems to me that implementing such a system might actually end up costing individuals MORE than it does now. If we're going to flood the system with tens of millions of new patients, the majority of whom pay little to no taxes, how will the government pay for it? Sure, they can play Blago and invent numbers and promise the money before figuring out how to pay for it, but that would be such an enormous drain on an already over-used social services budget. In the end it'll mean an even higher tax burden on people that, at least according to dems, already can't pay. In the end I guess maybe I want to ask this question: why do people feel that each and every individual is owed healthcare paid for by someone else? Why isn't the current system enough? You can't be denied service in emergencies, even if you are insolvent. 90% of children in the country get healthcare for free (thats a guess as to the percent, but I can think of at least 5 that have such laws and I'd imagine most others do as well). And there is ample amount of government aid in money, or government services and programs that are available. What would a universal health care system run by the government do to benefit the system? (and i'm not being smirky about it, i'd really like to know).

I don't want to piss on the study right off the bat, but really, there has to be SO many other factors in play here that simply comparing otherwise preventable deaths from country to country is just worthless. Are their major differences in the types of patients treated in each health system? What are the rates of preventable diseases? What are income levels? Do other countries serve as big of a group? Are the systems themselves comparable, in terms of advancement of care?

I own a 27" Samsung LCD thats about a year old and a 46" Sony rear projection that's about 4 years old. Both are great tv's. My suggestion would be to go to the store and look at a couple you like and write the model numbers down. Then go home and read as many reviews as possible. Then start searching for the lowest price. Most of the time you can get the same base model Samsung at Sams or Wal-mart a lot cheaper. I say base model because most of the time Best Buy/Circuit City models have additional features that you'd never need but they charge extra for. For example instead of spending $1000 on my 27 in from Best Buy I got essentially the same tv for $700 because it did not include a built-in cable card, something most people never need and I think it only had 2 hdmi slots instead of 3. Also, while you're at it, read a lot about the 720p v 1080p difference. People have bought expensive 1080p models, that are often two, three or four times as expensive, because they think they are getting a better product, but in reality their sources are not 1080p and won't be for years and years. So it's like buying a Ferrari that requires Extra plus gold platinum fuel for the best performance, but your local gas station only carries regular. Currently unless you have a ps3 or other hi-def player (not sure about what the 360 puts out) there are no 1080p sources. HD stations are still stuck at 720p or 1080i. But in addition to that, until you get into the 50+ inch range, even with the difference in sources (i.e. getting 1080i versus a 1080p), experts argue that a normal person can't see the difference. This opinion, obviously, is met with some contention, as most people want to feel like they've spent an extra grand justifiably. But read around and consider what you're using it for. For me, the biggest thing in the TV is the blacks. The better the black, the better the tv. If the tv's blacks are more like dark, dark grays, stay clear. Most of the tv's will probably look like that because the store jacks up the settings to the highest brightness and contrast to battle the store lights (and make you look at the tv), but if you look closely you'll be able to tell the difference between the quality of the colors.

What? A large-scale government project that wouldn't be as efficient or effective as one run by a free market? Seriously though, it's too bad morons like Edwards just can't seem to get this through his head. Also, what does this map prove? That more people do it? Who cares? The majority of the world hates gays and can't find food. Should we follow?

I think you have to hold R1 too. I'm at the same spot as you though, I just started playing a few days ago and can't seem to get the hang of it. The practice/tutorial thing was kind of a pain to get through and didn't really help much. I'm guessing it'll just be a play and play and play and get used to it. I don't understand why my players don't run at all. Unless I call a play every player stands around, even when I'm passing all over the court. Very strange. On another note, for anyone who is on the fence about Uncharted: Drake's Fortune for the ps3, I highly recommend it. I played it for the first time last night after getting it for xmas. I spent a solid 3-4 hours playing before going to bed. It looks fantastic and the gameplay is a lot of fun. I give it a 9/10.

QUOTE(bmags @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 10:56 AM) that wasn't really the point, but saying "hey if all that bad stuff wouldn't have happened we would've only lost by less." Your turnovers weren't boneheaded mistakes, they were forced by the heavy pressure USC was getting and good tackling. And it's not like you have tom brady back there throwing the ball, some int's should've been expected from juice. USC showed up to show that they were still among the best in the nation after having suffered the most embarrassing loss of the year, and they did that. Unfortunately, it's what we all predicted and all the bcs matches that everyone said would suck have sucked, unless either of these BCS games thrilled any of you. I'm not going to give excuses for the loss, but that was clearly not Illinois' best game. They made bone-head play after bone-head play. And USC got a ton of lucky bounces. USC capitalized like good teams do, but to say that Illinois and USC are in two different classes is just incorrect. I think USC is a better team, but Illinois could certainly beat them. After a night and morning to think about it, here's what I took from the game (1) our offensive coordinator was replaced with Ron Turner for the first quarter. Stubborn, pathetic play calling that should have been changed after the first two drives. (2) USC's defense wasn't all that great. Illinois shredded yet another top rushing defense. If only Locksley had called a few pass plays early instead of waiting until the last drive of the 2nd quarter. I think the running game could have done even more. (3) the defense, for its lack of overall speed and talent, played pretty damn good ball for 2.5 quarters until they realized that the offense was pathetic and throwing the game away. (4) i can't wait for the big time receiving core to show up on campus - last year it was the dropped passed, this year it was fumbles and poor route running. (5) martez wilson, while gifted athletically, takes horrible angles to the ball and is often caught out of position. Hopefully this summer he hits the film room and learns the game. (6) i'm still not sold on juice. even after the ohio state game I had concerns with his ability to pass. He has a cannon, but its a waste with a lack of touch and accuracy. He made some decent throws but normally it was the case of the WR making a better play than Juice making a good pass. Hopefully he works on this like crazy next year. Everyone will say his completion percentage jumped from like 36 to 56 percent, but really that doesn't mean much when 90% of his throws were part of the option or hitting rb's and wr's in the flats. (7) USC has no class. It's not wonder why most of the nation dislikes their program. They are arrogant and act like asses who have never won before. I hate Duke bball more than anyone else, but I respect the program because they act like winners who have been there before. (8) mcnight is f'n scary. I think that's all. I didn't expect Illinois to win, but I wanted them to play close. Until some bad breaks, they were in it. But such is life and they got beat bad. Hopefully next year will be better. Here's a question for Big Ten fans: how does next season play out? I think OSU will be the favorite with Illinois, Michigan State and possibly Wisky battling for 2nd. I think Michigan will be in for a long year with so many seniors leaving.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 1, 2008 -> 05:47 PM) Southern Cal > Illinois Yes, this year. Illinois has thrown the game away with all the turnovers and USC has gotten a lot of lucky bounces, literally. One thing for sure: USC is not the best team in the nation. They also have zero sportsmanship.

Probably the worst possible start to the game... Illinois can't afford to get down by more than 2 td's.

I don't see how it will help/hinder any candidate. If anything it'll just re-enforce to the American people how f***ed the middle east is, but that's nothing new. How would the President of the United States do anything to help that? The US is in a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-dont situation; if we try to intervene we're seen as imperialist bastards (by military or by culture) and if we don't we're seen as a greedy country unwilling to help a helpless part of the world. It's too bad we can't throw up big walls and say "f*** it, you guys kill each other, just make sure none of your missiles misfire."

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Dec 20, 2007 -> 12:28 PM) Zelda, Zelda and more Zelda... IMO it's theb est Wii game, though more are likely to choose Galaxy. Zak and Wiki is another solid choice if you're into puzzlers. It has the worst name ever, and a stupid-anime art-style, but it's gotten great reviews and I like it from what little I've played from it. There's a ton of awesome virtual console games as well. I suggest getting Ice Hockey. Unlimited fun for 5 bucks. May I ask what games came with your bundle? Usually they try and screw you over, but Galaxy, REUC, and WarioWare is a solid start. It was the WalMart bundle. I ended up with an extra set of controllers, a wireless sensor bar, Wii Play, Super Mario Galaxy, Warioware, REUC, sims castaway (for the gf), big brain academy (for the gf), mario party 8, and then i got the Simpsons but ended up returning it. I think I'm going to go pick up College Hoopse 2k8 for the ps3 instead. It was nice though because you got to pick from a long list of games. After playing drunken Wii with the family (warioware and wiisports was a big hit) I'd say it was definitely worth it. Galaxy seems solid thus far but I haven't had much time to play the rest. I would have picked up Zelda but I already had it for the gamecube. I heard Metroid is pretty solid, but I never was into those games for the earlier consoles. And yeah, I def plan on hitting up the virtual console. Mario 64 is tops on my list. I used to love that game.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 10:38 AM) Your ignorance is almost as poorly informed as it is laughable. The Illini program, going back to the late 80's, had been stopped by only the Deon Thomas scandal. Lon Krueger fixed it, Bill Self built it, and Bruce Weber has destroyed it. The two previous coaches to Weber had built/were building something very special in Champaign, and Bruce Weber in only a couple years has destroyed the program and sent it into a spiral of mediocrity that will last at a minimum two years, but more likely three or four, if not until there is a new coach. Not to mention the fact that Bruce couldn't sell water to a thirsty man in the desert, so I'll believe this great class of 2009 when it's signed. The numbers under Weber don't like: 2003-2004: 5 Self recruits starting, Sweet 16 2004-2005: 5 Self recruits starting (all as juniors and seniors), 5 NBA players, National Runner Up 2005-2006: 5 Self recruits starting, but lost Luther, Deron, Powell, and Ingram: blew 11 point 2nd half lead in 2nd round. 2006-2007: 4 Self recruits starting, but lost James and Dee, blew 13 point lead in 8 minutes to lose in 1st round 2007-2008: 1 Self recruit (the only one left) starting, no guard play, 6-4 record, NIT bound (maybe), only help incoming next season is the 100th 3 star big man Weber has signed, and a convicted felon. If that's not a bad coach ruining a great program that he inherited, I don't know what is. And he's done it FAST, I didn't even think the falloff would be this quick, I mean it's an undeserved fluke they were even in the tournament last year, should have been in the NIT with their resume. How can ignorance be informed? That makes no sense. You just proved my point about the other half of Illini nation. Tell me again how Self did here? An elite eight? 2 first round losses? Yeah, Weber sure buried the program with that national championship game. How many of those has Illinois been in the last 50 years? Look, I'm not saying the program isn't on the decline (albeit slight). I'm saying people think Illinois is and always has been this elite program and anything less than final four appearances is a failure. You can dream all you want about how Illinois would have won 5 championships the last 5 years if Self would have stayed (ask Kansas how that's worked out, even with lofty seedings and 5* studs). But that's just not the history of the program. Henson was there what, 15 years? And he made one final four?

All this crap about Weber getting fired is nonsense. The guy is one of the best coaches in the country. I love the irrational part of Illini Nation, the part that apparently forgot that the program was mediocre for the better part of 50 years with an occasional burst every now and again. Weber has made the program what it is (on the cusp of elite) in the last five years. Yeah yeah, other players recruits, blah blah. He still won a lot of games. People need to relax and step away from the ledge. Every program, even good programs, go through a s***ty stretch of seasons. I think given what Weber has done the last 5 years, I'm willing to let this season and the next play out until he gets his big time recruits in the building.