Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 01:16 PM) 30 years since the Bulls gave up 100 points this many times in a row. Defense isn't about talent, it is about effort and coaching. We have failed miserably in critical areas, which are damning to players on the roster, but also damning to the coach. I laughed at the Trestman comparison's earlier in the year, but its getting comical how bad things are. All I hear is players talk in soft tones, with exception of Taj. All talk, no action, 2016 Bulls. I'm sure Hoiberg expected to be playing a rookie and two end of the bench guys as starters. I mean let's look at this stuff in context. It's not like he doesn't understand they suck on the defensive end. He's been complaining about it all season. But what's he to do if the Bulls don't play defense? Sub guys? With who? They have no depth. The comparison to Trestman fails because Trestman also became an embarrassment for the franchise with the way he handled a lot of the day to day things as well as big roster things (like benching Cutler). I've watched a lot of the Bulls games this season and I've never really seen Hoiberg do any of those things. I fully supported his pre-season idea of sending Noah to the bench. What else has their been besides some little things here or there?

I wouldn't mind giving Hoiberg another year. It's not like the Donovan situation where he's had a full roster, few injuries and he makes boneheaded decisions. Hoiberg just isn't getting wins and the team plays without energy. Sure, he gets part of the blame for that, but he's not the sole reason.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 12:31 PM) Romney to the rescue? Is this really happening? http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-elect...al-race-n530451 Ha, it says right in that article he's not jumping in the race.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 12:04 PM) As soon as he gave the indication that the players didn't have to listen to Thibs, he undermined everything the Bulls had built (if those reports are in fact true). The worse part in all of this is, somehow, JR will be loyal and Gar will still be here. You keep saying this, do you have proof this happened? What are you basing this on?

QUOTE (chw42 @ Mar 1, 2016 -> 04:46 PM) Sure, you can make that argument for certain main roles. You need big names to attract audiences and I think everyone understands that. But how do you explain Hollywood casting no-name white actors in place of Asians and Arabs in supporting roles? Don't they usually? I think that's probably more of an exception than the norm if they don't.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 1, 2016 -> 04:35 PM) And therefore, you are hereby prohibited from dispensing any further advice. I think the problem is that people can't take what an athlete says as "just another opinion," and for many they hold athletes up to impossible standards. They're all normal people who just happen to do one thing really well. They all have faults. Some are terrible people. Just because they have a platform doesn't mean people should/need to listen to what they have to say as if it's any more important than what the homeless guy on the street is shouting. Yet for some reason in this country we put them on pedestals and then when they crack and show their real selves we wonder why.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Mar 1, 2016 -> 03:33 PM) Hold on. I'm confused. If the reason minority actors don't get opportunities is because there is less profit and more risk in casting minority actors, then how is race NOT the driving force behind the lack of opportunity? Because it's fundamentally about money concerns first. A studio deciding to cast Gellynhaal instead of an Iranian actor for Prince of Persia wasn't due to the studio thinking Iranian's were inferior people. They were concerned about their hundred or two hundred million dollar investment flopping if they didn't get a big enough actor to get people to show up to the movie theater. Hollywood has had no trouble the last 30 years casting/paying top dollar to black actors/actresses that are popular enough to carry movies. Richard Pryor, Eddie Murphy, Denzel, Will Smith, etc. etc. were/are superstars. I think when you go back to the actual racist Hollywood from decades and decades ago, then it really was blacks can't act, they shouldn't be on TV/big screens, people shouldn't see blacks/whites together, etc.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Mar 1, 2016 -> 01:52 PM) It works both ways. Chris Rock took a cheap shot at Asian-Americans (for being smart and hard-working, and doubling down with a child labor bit) and almost nobody in the world noticed, except for Jeremy Lin, who I guess is now the defender of all Asians in the minds of the media because he went to Harvard and is the most famous Asian athlete most Americans know. As for Gods of Egpyt, you should at least make an attempt to diversify part of your cast simply because it does make economic sense these days. Look at Star Wars and especially the Fast and Furious series...audiences want to see women as action stars, Hispanic or black characters they can identify with, more diversity. The melting pot, as long as it feels natural and organic. Just as insulting is integrating Chinese stars for maybe three to five minutes into X-Men and Transformers movies to pander to the audience here in China. It worked to an extent, but now expectations have risen and Chinese studios are demanding more or simply creating more co-productions as well as buying up US studios and theatre chains. To summarize, Affirmative Action or required participation in movies based on being 12% African American, 14% Hispanic, 7% Asian (but Asian worldwide dominates due to India and China) and 1% Native Americans won't work...so what is your suggestion that's actually feasible? I would counterargue that more movies aiming for small niche Hispanic and African-American audiences are profitable than the average "almost all white cast" movie...but the studios do typically role the dice on four quadrant movies that can lead to huge profits or four baggers as they're called. Tyler Perry movies, for example...almost always profitable until recently. Friday and most of the early Ice Cube movies. As a culture, can we honestly be satisfied only with "buddy" comedy movies with one black and one white star paired together...or anything with Will Smith or Denzel Washington since white America is more comfortable with them? I don't know what the solution is. I'm just saying I think there's a non-racist reason why there aren't more opportunities for minority actors in this country. It has more to do with profit and risk than it does race, especially when it comes to bigger box office movies.

Ty Lawson getting bought out. Wouldn't mind the Bulls picking him up to see if he's truly terrible or if he was just terrible for Houston.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 29, 2016 -> 05:06 PM) First of all, I don't think many white people saw The Artist, Carol, The Room or Brooklyn, either...to respond to an earlier comment. I also doubt many white people saw Beasts of No Nation or the documentary about honor killings in Pakistan. That's not the point. When they constantly make movies and "whitewash" the characters like in Aloha or Gods of Egypt, there's a real issue. As far as Asia goes, what Jimmy said is largely true. Denzel Washington action movies like Man on Fire or the Equalizer don't sell well here at all. Now if you throw Chris Pine and a train into the story, great. Same thing with stories involving interracial romance unless it's mostly white men with Asian women. The only way you can be embraced is as a martial arts crossover star. And, in general, comedies don't translate...so you'll never have a Kevin Hart movie. About the only exception was the Rush Hour series with Tucker and Chan and Zhang Ziyi, but, even then it got banned by the third movie for negative stereotypes about Chinese triads/criminal activity. On the other hand, Kobe Bryant and Stephon Marbury (plays in Chinese league still) are wildly popular, as well as some of the African footballrs in the Euro leagues...but, once again, not in the context of movies and tv shows. In general, I typically hear comments like "black people are dirty/meaning not white or pale skin as well" and the worst one, that lots of black people (students here from Africa mostly) all have disease/s. Most Chinese parents and grandparents won't allow their children to date men of color as well. While I do see quite a few college or university interracial couples...the eventual marriage rate is infinitesimal. There is a legitimate reason for that though and people just want to ignore it. If Ridley Scott wants to make that 100% authentic film he won't get nearly the same budget (or even a green light) to do it. The studios know it simply won't make the same kind of money. It has nothing to do with studio heads not liking black people or thinking that they're inferior human beings. As Chris Rock correctly pointed out, Will Smith can't b**** about lack of opportunity when he got 20 million to make Wild, Wild, West. So the question is, is it Hollywood's responsibility to lose money and "force" people into watching movies they don't want to see as much as others? And the response has been equally ludicrous. Russell Simmons created his own award show SOLELY FOR BLACK PEOPLE. Because what better way to combat discrimination and racism than to discriminate and be racist. edit: and the whole basis of this thread, Eaton's tweet, truly proves what a pathetic society we've become. So much white guilt. So much trying to prove how not racist you are by being unreasonably and stupidly outraged over nothing.

Puerto Rico was a blast. Highly recommend it for a bachelor party. Ended up doing a spearfishing trip, a hike through El Yunque to La Mina falls (that was raging after a big rain), a trip to the Luqillo Kiosks, and then a couple of days spent in and around Old San Juan. Lots of Medilla Light was consumed.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 02:52 PM) This is actually where I think she'd do far better than Sanders. She wouldn't get angry. Angry plays right into it. She'd just give him rope, and let the people who are deciding the election (those not pre-selected based on party) see him for what he is. THat's among the reasons I'm quite confident he loses vs Clinton, if he gets the nomination. Conversely, she'll come off as the stiff, boring, entrenched politician that she is (an image she can't shake and is a problem even with liberal voters) while Trump continues to beat the more fun, outgoing, anti-establishment drum, a drum that is resonating despite all the dumb stuff he says. Either way, it'll be fun to watch. I still think if a lot of Dems just say screw it and don't vote because they don't like Trump or Clinton, he's got a shot. He's not going to pull a lot of people from the left, but he'll attract some undecideds and it's pretty clear something about him is getting voters interested and out there voting. And it's not just "he says racist s***."

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 02:15 PM) Hillary doesn't exactly get flustered by bloviating idiots. She's going up against a complete unknown. He could say literally anything at any time. Whether she gets flustered or not is beside the point. I want to see her reaction when he accuses her of not being able to control her own house, let alone the country, etc.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 02:06 PM) This is true but it will be even funnier when he brings up Bill getting head in the Oval Office. Hence why we should all be rooting for him. Those debates would be amazing television.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 11:51 AM) There's a reason folks settled on the west side of the great lakes Access to the Illinois and Mississippi rivers? Snowing pretty good downtown. Windy too.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 10:41 AM) Trump is moderate on a lot of issues so they are not the problem. The problem is making sure the hard right gives him support as they are the base. Republicans ultimately show up to vote no matter, so I don't think it'll be a big deal. Agreed. I think the question is, of those X million undecideds, how many are scared away from Trump and run to Hillary, how many despise both Trump and Hillary and decide to stay home, or how many join the bandwagon? Trump, IMO, has a shot against Hillary because Dems just don't get motivated to vote for candidates that they don't really care for. The young, for example, want Bernie. Are they going to show up to vote for Hillary? Are women voters? I'm hoping for a Trump v. Sanders election. God, think of the comedy that campaign would produce.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 08:13 AM) El Morro is awesome. If you're there on a nice Sunday, you'll see hundreds of people flying kites on the lawn leading up to it. I'd recommend La Bombonera for breakfast, but I was disappointed to find out a month ago that they closed permanently. Lots of places have mallorca breakfast sandwiches, though, so definitely find somewhere to try one. Not everyone loves mofungo (big ball of mashed and fried plantains served with delicious meats/seafood/vegetables), but I thought it was delicious. I haven't done the Bacardi tour, but my wife, mom and mother-in-law did and didn't think it was worth the trip. Maybe on a bachelor party it'd be more fun, though. El Yunque was pretty cool. Arecibo is about an hour west of San Juan. That's the huge radiotelescope that they used in both Contact and Goldeneye. It's a nice drive through the mountains, but not sure if it's really a bachelor party thing unless you've got some sciency nerds in the group (plus you'd need to rent a car). edit: this is appropriate for the winter weather thread because it makes us think of places that don't have crap weather I know we're definitely making a trip to Old San Juan/El Murro. I'll have to talk them into Arecibo. We are renting a big 15 passenger van, so it may be worth a drive. We're not nerds, necessarily, but if you can see the satellite from a road or whatever I think most of the group would at least think it was cool based on Goldeneye alone. I know we're also doing a food and drink tour, so that should be fun. We were debating doing the Don Q tour but that's in Ponce and we'll be in San Juan. And yeah, i'm looking forward to the weather. 84 and sunny for 4 days. Now I just have to hope I get there. Tomorrow could be a 14-15 hour travel day if the weather sucks and I get delayed.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Feb 22, 2016 -> 09:35 AM) Got a replacement Sirius radio installed on my car yesterday. I needed a new one because the old one stopped working a while back. I was gonna cancel but they offered to send me a new radio for free included with a $100 one year subscription so I took that. So I had to call to get the new radio activated. It took 10 minutes for the customer service representative to get the idea that I did not need or want to bundle this with a new package or purchase this or that. It was frustrating. Finally, she got it and then this interchange occurred. Sirius: Oh, so you just want to swap out your old radio for this new one? Me: Yes. Sirius: Ok, there is a $15 flat service fee to do that. Is that okay with you? Me: No. Sirius: Oh. . Ok, I will waive that fee for you. I wish you could do that with everything They're pretty awesome when it comes to discounts. They know anything they get you to pay is gravy. I keep re-upping for 6 month subscriptions for $24.99. I'll call and say I want to cancel, they'll offer me some deal like $99.99 for a year. I'm like, um, how about $25 for 6 months? "Let me look....yep, I can do that for you."

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 11:14 AM) Yea it was a good one, not fantastic but a worthwhile follow. Lots of actors that I like in it so it was cool to see them work together. The story was kind of over the top, but I really liked the style, the locale was pretty great, the actors were all very good and had good chemistry. There was just enough of a tease from episode to episode to keep you interested. I dug it. I'm interested to see if it gets picked up for another season and if so what the story would be.

Anyone catch Mad Dogs on Amazon? I breezed through that this week. Give it a solid B, worth the watch IMO.

QUOTE (shipps @ Feb 22, 2016 -> 04:29 PM) Enjoy dude. I had a great time there a couple months ago. Any must see/do's? Going on a bachelor party for 5 days. I think the only activity planned so far is spearfishing.

I'm leaving for Puerto Rico thursday morning. Hopefully this thing stays away.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Feb 22, 2016 -> 12:15 PM) That doesn't force apple to recode it's operating system. That's a choice. That's the difference. The US Government is trying to strip Apple of that choice...because that's very American. The rest of what you said I already addressed. Now, stop comparing this to a technology from the 1800's in wired communications. It's different because the underlying technology is entirely different. It's a horse and buggy analogy vs a stealth fighter. Not the same. You're not seeing the forest through the trees. The complexity of the technology does not matter. It's the government forcing a company to assist with its investigations by utilizing expertise on the company's own product. Be it a landline telephone or a cellphone, it doesn't matter.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Feb 22, 2016 -> 12:12 PM) No, today it's a dead terrorist. Tomorrow it's you, because you MIGHT have pirated music on your phone. The next day, it's your buddy, because he got pulled over for speeding and he MIGHT be a drug dealer. It's a slippery slope specifically BECAUSE there are no laws limiting when, how and why they can use the courts for this. You may be ok with that, because 'OMG TERRORISTS', but I'm not. Oh please. Once the NSA starts listening to a phone calls they'll listen to everyone's phone calls! There's no stopping them! 3 This is conspiracy theory nonsense.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 22, 2016 -> 12:11 PM) Thats not really what the government is asking Apple to do. I could easily get into that individual's phone, but they want access to all phones through the OS. No they don't. And they don't have authority to do that. Did you read the order they obtained? They have authority to obtain the information from this one specific phone. They want Apple to remove the feature in the OS that auto-deletes all data once the password attempt limit is reached. They're not asking Apple to do it. They're telling Apple, we're going to break into this thing, make sure when we do it won't delete everything. Given the extremely limited circumstance, I don't see a problem with it.