Soxbadger

It really doesnt matter as its entirely hypothetical, I just cant see China's reaction to imperialism being "We have to protect the less powerful." Im pretty sure their reaction would be "Where can we sign up and how much do we get." There are less than 10 atomic countries, and the majority of nuclear reserves are held by 2 (USA/Russia). The US can do what it wants to most of the world with there being very little chance at any retaliation. Thankfully the US after World War II did not go imperialistic and instead tried to help most countries retain sovereignty.

Which countries are going to interfere? If the US started, most of the other powerful countries would just join in. I really cant see France or England interfering for the sake of interference (nor are they going to take a nuke for Saudi Arabia.) Most of the atomic countries are hands off internationally for fear of US strike. If the US started, you would see another era of imperialism. There may be small skirmishes in the imperial lands, but its unlikely that China/US/etc are going to fight if each of them get a piece of the pie.

The last 11 years have shown that you cant play nice and still control territories. I assure you if we used more extreme methods, we could make sure that we had control of what we needed. We dont need the majority of the country, we just need the current oil rigs. We can easily set up security perimeters and kill on site. We can napalm cities, or massacre civilians to keep them in line. Terrorism works against a country like the US, because most people in the US are unwilling to be evil. If the US had a Nazi mindset, I have no doubt that we could easily control most of the worlds oil reserves. Thankfully the US is unwilling to go there, but we do have the capability.

I agree its fun, I just meant that I dont get into the whole doom/gloom of not having an amazing signing day. At the same time if we did get a star recruit Id be happy. Im just as hypocritical.

I think the article loses steam when he starts to get into Iraq. I was never a proponent of attacking Iraq to bring freedom, I always felt that posed a problem in terms of sovereignty. That being said, there is definitely a line that can be crossed by a govt when another outside govt has to interfere, regardless of sovereignty (example would be death camps.) Where we draw the line, will ultimately depend on where we sit at that moment. Of course our interests are going to put us in awkward situations, of course our interests are going to make all of this murky. That is what happens when you want what is best for you and are trying to help other people achieve freedom. Once they are free, they may turn on us. They may become extremists, who knows. The problem for US interests is that what we are seeing right now does not fit into the United States narrative. We are not good at being the bad guy, and that is the problem the US will face with the Muslim world. As long as some of the, perceive us as the great satan, etc, it is going to be hard for the US to blindly back their freedom. How can you in good conscious help people come to power who may turn on you? We sit on the sidelines things can go bad. We interfere things can go bad. This is the problem of the US. We want to control things, we want to use our power, but we want to use it in a way that we arent forcing people into things. We could easily take over a large portion of the worlds oil supply and not even blink But we dont, because we try and play nice. The only problem is that the the other side doesnt always do what we want.

Planned Parenthood isnt anti-abortion, at least I dont believe so. Ive actually never gone there to shop for an abortion, so im not 100% sure.

As a Wisconsin fan Im extremely leery of recruiting stars and all that jazz. I started following it pretty closely back in the day and realized that stars dont always tell the whole story. Josh Ogelsby is one of the highest rated recruits Wisconsin has gotten, yet he has been a pretty big disappointment. Conversely JJ Watt was a walk on from CMU who earned a scholarship and may go in the first round of the draft this year. Its good fun though, especially when there isnt a game for another 6 months.

Democracy can have unintended consequences. The truth is Egypt could turn into another Iran, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind this is a possibility. But that is the price of allowing other people to be free, they may not agree with us. That being said, there have been elected European leaders who are arguably far worse than any leader in the Middle East. Who knows how it will turn out, but in my opinion there is a very real possibility that revolution/reform does not end in the US being on great terms with Egypt. If we truly believe in people's right to freedom, then we have to accept that there may be adverse consequences.

Tosh was pretty solid, I think we all need a 2 handed broad sword.

They just announced Lake Shore Drive is closed.

That was close, Purdue was really hot for a while there and they could have easily won. Next up MSU if Wisconsin can some how win again theyd be some how in the top 15. Obviously id be thrilled with a 4 seed or better.

Just got home from the loop (left at about 4pm). If you are traveling, I suggest avoiding Lake Shore Drive. When I got there it was completely backed up and had very little visibility. Id suggest other streets.

Yep looks like this is for real. My office is refusing to close early and wont give any comment on tomorrow. Conversely the Chipotle that I frequent closed today at 2pm and wont open until tomorrow. Should be a fun night!

The grocery store was already crowded with people due to the storm. Kind of an overreaction.

You dont have to use hospitals that receive govt funding. I just assume that the majority of hospitals do receive some sort of state/govt funding for research etc. And once again, I termed it as "bogus" you are now trying to get me to argue a point that I dont necessarily agree with, thus Im not just going to speculate on the many different ways I could try and cloak it as privilege. Furthermore, it could be under necessary and proper clause or commerce clause, which would give even more variations on the argument. I was merely stating what we already know: "Mandatory insurance clauses have been allowed" and trying to figure out how the US govt would perhaps argue that this is the same. Im not in any way shape or form representing the US govt, I am merely speculating on what I would expect. As for what other laws, it depends on the how the SC rules. If they rule that Congress cannot pass a law that takes away a right, I would think that you would see a lot of cases trying to argue that drug laws are unconstitutional. Citizens have the right to eat,why can the govt restrict what we eat? If they erode commerce clause, it may be something different. Its hard to try and predict what the SC will do and then predict what the ramifications of the predicted ruling are. Which is why my post is nothing more than trying to read tea leaves and give some opinions based on the limited knowledge that I have. It may be right, it may be wrong, but its just my opinion.

I think you missed the intent of that comment. I mean that if the federal govt can some how say that health insurance is related to a privilege. I was using car insurance as an already accepted mandatory insurance, and saying that all the federal govt has to do is cloak the health insurance argument the same way, and they should win. The term "bogus" was meant to apply to the unknown reason the govt will use to tie health insurance to a privilege. I personally think there is no way to overturn the law without putting a lot of other federal laws at risk. Due to that, I am going to predict that the SC will uphold the law, even though on this issue they would be more inclined to overturn it. So i wasnt ignoring it at all, I was basically saying that the govt will come up with some reason to make it work. Just like they do with the commerce clause, or any other time they need the federal law to go further than it may have originally been intended. I didnt want to speculate on how they would argue its based on privilege but my guess is that they will say going to hospitals which are federally funded are a privilege and therefore in order to use the hospital system you must have insurance.

A quote like that makes me sad to be in the same profession as the Judge because it shows a complete fundamental lack of understanding about the Boston Tea Party. Its not that the tax itself that people were against,it was the "NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION." Unlike the current US govt, the colonials did not have representation in the British parliament. The entire Revolutionary War was over the fact that we did not have representation in parliament and therefore the tax was unfair because the British were taxing American colonists and the colonists had no real rights or representation in the British govt. Now lets apply those facts to the current situation. The Health Care bill was passed by the US congress, which is made up of (wait for it), Representatives. Thus when the Health Care Bill was passed, there was representation for the people and thus distinguishable from the Boston Tea Party (laws created with no representation.) Poor reasoning that shows a complete and fundamental misunderstanding of our history. A much more compelling (and why this law can not be overturned judicially) would be that the US has the right to create drug/consumption laws therefore the US has the right to create health laws. If the US does not have the right to force me to buy health insurance, citing that it is for the health and welfare of society, than it doesnt have the right to stop me from injecting heroin and topping it off with some cocaine. Either the US has the right to create laws for the health and welfare of society, or it doesnt. Im fine either way, but I have a feeling the people who are adamantly against the insurance law arent going to be favorable to legalizing every illegal substance either.

Not sure how that ruling would work, unless they are going to argue that only the states have the right to enact such legislature (would be quite the bizarre result). Basically we already know that a state can require insurance as long as they can make up some bogus excuse that the insurance is related to a privilege (ie the mandatory auto insurance requirement is based on the fact that driving is a privilege.) Thus its clear that a state can require mandatory insurance if its enacted properly. I would assume that the federal govt can do the same thing, provided that the federal govt rests it on the similar grounds. If the US Supreme Court does get involved this is going to be a political nightmare decision, because if they take away the power for the fed, there are going to be other laws/rules that come under attack. I cant see the Supreme Court eroding the the federal power that much, but maybe.

Put me in the Ill believe it when I see it category.

Omer was actually effective against Howard (besides for the fouls).

Im a big Bob Knight fan as well (I always liked him). Also Bo Ryan claims that Knight taught him most of the system that he uses at a coaching clinic. And right now Wisconsin is arguably the toughest place to play in basketball, at least if we use statistical winning percentage.

Indiana being this bad is no good for the Big 10. I guess my expectation of Indiana getting into the top half of the Big 10, is more tempered than some expectations of Indiana returning to Bob Knight glory. I think we can all agree on how bad Iowa is

I used to follow recruiting heavily, but I stopped once I realized that I dont care about fancy stars and Id rather judge the players myself. So im not sure what Indiana's future recruiting classes look like, all I can tell you is what Indiana's present team looks like. And presently they dont have any dynamite freshman that Id say are 5 star elite recruits. I guess I dont care about sell outs and atmosphere, that doesnt win games, the players on the court do. And until the sell outs and atmosphere start equaling points and wins, Ill just say that you can have the best environment in the world and it wont get you anywhere if the kids cant play. I actually dont care about the Marquette Wisconsin rivalry, I didnt even know it was a rivalry until I left school. As I was not from Wisconsin, I only considered Big 10 schools to be rivals (where my friends went). It wasnt unitl I started reading Rivals/Scout that I found out there was a rivalry between Marquette and Wisconsin. I try not to let my fandom interfere with my judgments of teams or programs. I wouldnt say I hate Crean, I dont even dislike him, I just think hes an average coach/recruiter. It really doesnt matter to me, Wisconsin is the team I care about and people are never going to respect them anyways. Just in my personal opinion Indiana is not a significantly better job than most in the Big 10.

Im sure Crean said that he wouldnt leave Marquette for Wisconsin, the problem with saying that is he never was offered or even considered for the Wisconsin job (nor the Illinois job as Weber is the coach and there was no opening.) Over the last 20 years Illinois has done considerably better than Indiana at recruiting Chicago prospects. In fact Indiana has done a poor job of holding onto the top tier of prospects in their own state (Greg Oden), so I dont think you can really say Indiana can pull from Illinois just as easily. Illinois generally gets the most recruits from Chicago, this includes over teams such as Kansas etc. Im not one to really care about star ratings, Ill judge the players when they hit the floor. I also have yet to see a Spring Creaning (when Crean gets rid of guys who arent playing as well to open up new schollies), will this go over well in Indiana? As for bigger media presence, thats your opinion. I personally think Illinois blows Indiana out of the water. I watch a ton of Big 10 basketball and my impression of Indiana is pretty low. The biggest impact Indiana has had recently has been the Sampson scandal. Indiana is not really an important team in the current Big 10 make up. I cant imagine Indiana leaving Illinois in the dust, as even during the Bob Knight years, Illinois was still one of the top programs. Personally I think Crean may get Indiana to be at Minnesota levels, but there is very little reason to believe he will be more successful than Bo Ryan, Matta or Izzo. I could be wrong, but Ive seen Marquette from 1999 on and Crean never really impressed me.

They didnt show the flipping the bird scene, weak.