Soxbadger

I didnt join because I didnt want to deal with worrying about payment, collecting, etc. I do that for a job, not for fun. My final 4 was: OSU, Wisconsin, Kansas and UConn KU- OSU final OSU win

I hate to say it, but that seems like an email written by some one else to try and screw Kappa Sigma.

I wasnt around 30 years ago so im not going to get into moral equivalencies. I hope that we as a human civilization try and learn from our mistakes and hope for a better future. Maybe the UN should have gotten more directly involved sooner, but its hard to tell what the facts are, and cases like this where its entirely within the sovereign nation are a very slippery slope. The UN has a lot of different voices and not all of them are on board with Democratic revolutions. We do what we can with the hand we are dealt. I dont see any other nation doing more than the US, we cant always be the only ones.

How is it too little too late? We could roll Gaddafi faster than Saddam fell. Revolutions and Civil Wars can take years. The idea that most countries would fall like Egypt was extremely hopeful at best. When you have multiple countries acting its always going to take time, especially when you are talking about action where its completely within the sovereignty of the nation. Obviously the hope was that Gaddafi would fortify his position, not go on the offensive, but hes forced people's hands. (Edit) To explain why it would be easier to take out Gaddafi, is because of Tripoli and most Liyban cities proximity to the Mediterranean. Unlike Baghdad which is completely landlocked and we had to go through other positions first. In Libya we could immediately threaten Gaddafi in Tripoli, which would most likely force him to give up his forward positions to reinforce the capital.

They could set up a no fly zone, the problem is that Gaddafi's significant advantage is on the ground. Libya air force is limited at best, and if a no fly zone was put in place, Libya would most likely just ground their airplanes. The reason why the US hinted at striking ground targets, is that the US knows that to beat Gaddafi they are going to have to take out his armored divisions. Its pretty easy to say that the US destroyed a bunch of anti-aircraft armored unitts, when in fact they were just regular tanks. I think the tide has turned though. Gaddafi's advances towards the rebels position has put the UN in a precarious position. It was easy to sit on the sidelines when it was a stalemate or possible that rebels were going to win on their own. The UN is now facing a possibility that Gaddafi puts down the rebellion and my guess is that there are serious concerns about Gaddafi doing some sort of genocide. If I had to predict right now based on tea leaves Id say that if Gaddafi does not agree to the UN cease fire, the UN will do the following: 1) No Fly Zone 2) Declare Benghazi a humanitarian protection zone, authorizing direct assistance from UN members to put troops on the ground in Benghazi. They will say that the troops will not make advances in Libya, but that they will prevent a genocide situation in Benghazi. That resolution should force Gaddafi to either come to the table to negotiate or attack the UN troops. Either way I do not believe that Gaddafi will end in power in Libya, to many European countries that rely on Libyan oil have come out against him, they cant let him stay in charge of their oil resources.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_...-wikileaks.html That article makes no sense. The presentation was clearly made to multiple countries including the US, why should the comments and inner thoughts of the US diplomat or member of the US embassy be revealed to the world? I still have yet to hear a good reason why emails and personal thoughts/impressions should be public knowledge. I sure know that I wouldnt want people obtaining my personal and work email and then letting the world see it. Those emails are unfiltered and often contain off the cuff remarks and initial impressions. Things can easily be taken out of context and there is a reason why we have privacy. Just because they work for the govt does not mean that they should be subject to this type of scrutiny.

US cant intervene because there is enormous pressure to stay out. This isnt about Libya, this is about future protests in China, Russia or Saudi Arabia. The writing is on the wall, if there are protests in China and China responds with the most brutal crackdown of the 21st century, China wants to make sure there is no precedent for no fly zones or military intervention from the UN as a result of cracking down on protesters. I discussed a lot about sovereignty issues in the Iraq war, and how would the US respond to another country telling us how to handle our own internal struggles. Its sad, but right now the only way that the US can get involved is by going outside of the UN. Due to the Afghanistan and Iraq issues, the US just does not have the political cache to go against the world community. Its time for some one else to stand up.

Its possible that Atlantis both existed and was used as an allegory by Plato. Some of Plato's account seems based in fact: While some is clearly hyperbole: I think that given the new evidence it is likely what we consider "Atlantis" was a piece of land that was either connected to Spain or a small island in close proximity to Spain. What we do know is that the Pillars of Hercules refers to the Strait of Gibraltar which would be in close proximity to the new finding. We are talking antiquity here so the historical record is going to be weak at best.

You can point to defensive efficiency and offensive efficiency stats until you are blue in the face, but if you watch Wisconsin play you know 2 things: 1) They are not the 2nd best offense in the country 2) They are not the 60th defense in the country. I do not know why their pace makes those stats skewed, but it clearly does. There is just no way Wisconsin is the 2nd most efficient offense in the nation, its a team that goes 4-8 minutes without scoring a point, only staying in the game because of their defense. So once again, you can point at the stats, or I can go by what I have seen. Slow pace helps defense, the slow pace Wisconsin plays is the equivalent of having a great run game in football. It does not count as a defensive statistic, but it changes how the other team plays. If they know that youll run 35 seconds off the clock or that if they give up a rebound its potentially a minute on defense, they play different on offense. And I know that most people dont like to watch fundamental basketball, but it wins games. And at the end of the day, I dont think Wisconsin wins as many games as they do right now with any other system. People are acting as if Ive never seen Wisconsin and am just going based on their reputation, I watch every single minute of every game. This is what my eyes tell me, and they tell me they arent #2 on offense and not #60 on defense.

And most loopholes have been closed. Incorporating in Delaware you still have to register as a foreign corp in Illinois and you still have to pay Illinois taxes for whats earned in IL. In terms of the online tax, I dont like it, but I also dont purchase many things online so it wont really hurt me. I can see their reasoning behind it, and its actually something that probably should be taken care of. The loophole exists because when the tax laws were written we didnt have internet and physical presence actually meant something.

Defensive basketball is winning basketball. Look at the NBA and which teams are successful this year.

My prediction is that people are sad when Wisconsin beats Belmont.

Play in game is not part of the tournament. Winning gets those other teams into the tournament thus they are not part of the play in game.

I agree that it is entirely going to be the team that shoots better. But since I cant predict who will be hot or cold, Ill go with the team that has 2 potential NBA players (Leuer and Taylor) and who can hopefully take over a game.

Once again, you can use the stats all you want, Im just not going to be that concerned about a defense that outside of 1 game, never lost by more than 10 to only tournament teams on the road or neutral sites. I just dont see a lot of games Wisconsin lost that was because of their defense. Most of the games they lost was due to their offense going long stretches without scoring. I dont believe there is a statistic for that, but the only game that Wisconsin got beat bad defensively was OSU.

Defensive efficiency at 63 isn't really bad considering how many offenses they played with top 40 efficiency (OSU, Purdue, PSU, ILL and NU) especially considering the difference between MSU (35th defense) and Wisconsin (63) is 1.6 points, which I can only imagine is much closer if you take out the OSU game where they went 18-19 from 3. Its one of those times where the stats are not exactly correct. Now Im not going to say Wisconsin is the best defense, but they are certainly a tough defense.

Wisconsin gave up over 70 points 1 time the entire season, how is defense their problem? As I have said the entire season, Wisconsin is a very difficult team to pick because they rely on shooting. If they are cold ie PSU where they shot 2-21 from 3, including Leuer and Taylor going 1-13, they could quite easily lose to Baylor. But the Wisconsin defense gives up less than 70 points a game, and that is going to give Belmont trouble. It is Wisconsin's game to lose, if they shoot well they win, if they shoot bad they lose. I personally think that it is a great draw for Wisconsin as they are not going against any super athletic teams that can beat Wisconsin even on Wisconsin's best day.

Can the Big 10 take back Painter's award and give it to a deserving coach?

Most reasonable people can agree with the above post (imo). I think if that most people would have agreed with Walker if he only wanted to modify pensions and make employees pay reasonably for benefits. The problem is that Walker wanted to destroy the union, and I just cant get behind that. Id rather pay through the nose, than let the govt take away peoples rights. I know Im in the minority here but rights are more important than money.

The problem is when Leuer posts up he doesnt get the same foul calls as Sullinger does. Its probably because Leuer is 6'10 and so when he jumps hes clearly above the defender, where as no matter how high Sullinger jumps a defenders arm seems to be coming down on him.

Brand and Sullinger are pretty similar, I just feel that Sullinger has gotten a lot of soft calls. I know that as an OSU you fan you disagree, but thats just my perspective. http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?a...;p1=elton-brand I just dont like undersized power forwards, but thats just my bias.

Sullinger's best case scenario is Elton Brand. Unless he can some how become a Charles Barkley, Sullinger's impact is going to be limited as he isnt that tall and he wont get 10+ ft's a game in the pros.

Correct me if im wrong, but no one made the govt agree to those deals, the govt voluntarily contracted them. Now I agree that the govt may have been stupid to make the deals, and that it may be wise for the Union to voluntarily amend those deals so that it doesnt force the state into BK, but that doesnt mean its okay for the govt to completely take away the unions rights, just because the govt screwed up.

Ive only been watching on Espn 3 the last few, and obviously Illinois hasnt looked good at all in that stretch.

Seems that Michigan is out to prove me wrong. Thankfully I dont care about Michigan or Illinois winning as they have to play OSU next.