Jump to content

Soxbadger

Members
  • Posts

    19,754
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by Soxbadger

  1. Wisconsin only hasnt made it out of the first round 1 time under Bo Ryan. They have made Sweet Sixteen or better 3 out of the last 9 years. Most teams dont make the Sweet Sixteen 1/3 seasons, Especially not teams that are constantly rated outside of the top 25 to start the season. It would be one thing if they were consistently rated in the top 25, but they are always left out.
  2. Why is that? Wisconsin has been consistently rated not in the top 25 to start the year, consistently has its "talent" level attacked, yet all they do is produce results. # At the end of the 2008-09 season Ryan had a 73.3 winning percentage at Wisconsin. # He has a 76.7 career winning percentage. Among coaches with 500 career wins his percentage ranks second only to Roy Williams. # In Big Ten Conference play Ryan has a 70.7 winning percentage. That ranks first all time among Big Ten coaches with at least five years of experience. Wisconsin is one of the most underrated teams every year, which means that the Big 10's perception is usually lower because people dont respect Wisconsin.
  3. If I get to add books ive seen, id have higher but here goes: 1 Pride and Prejudice - Jane Austen 2 The Lord of the Rings - JRR Tolkien 3 Jane Eyre - Charlotte Bronte - Also read Wide Sargasso Sea 4 Harry Potter series - JK Rowling 5 To Kill a Mockingbird - Harper Lee 6 The Bible 8 Nineteen Eighty-Four - George Orwell Probably my 2nd favorite book after Brave New World 10 Great Expectations - Charles Dickens 11 Little Women - Louisa M Alcott 13 Catch 22 - Joseph Heller 14 Complete Works of Shakespeare 16 The Hobbit - JRR Tolkien 18 Catcher in the Rye - JD Salinger 22 The Great Gatsby - F Scott Fitzgerald 27 Crime and Punishment - Fyodor Dostoyevsky 28 Grapes of Wrath - John Steinbeck 33 Chronicles of Narnia - CS Lewis 36 The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe - CS Lewis 49 Lord of the Flies - William Golding 57 A Tale Of Two Cities - Charles Dickens 58 Brave New World - Aldous Huxley Arguably my favorite book 66 On The Road - Jack Kerouac 76 The Inferno - Dante 87 Charlotte’s Web - E.B. White 91 Heart of Darkness - Joseph Conrad 92 The Little Prince - Antoine De Saint-Exupery 98 Hamlet - William Shakespeare 99 Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - Roald Dahl 100 Les Miserables - Victor Hugo Im surprised at how many ive read because I havent read a book in its entirety since Frosh year of college. And most of these books I read in High School or younger.
  4. The Ricketts dont have the type of cash necessasary to buy some of the neighboring properties and really build a new facility that would make economic sense. As long as the field is trapped between clark, addison, sheffield, it is what it is. They definitely should revamp it though, but this is an ownership group that doesnt have a lot of money to throw around.
  5. Soxbadger

    Health Care

    $123.63 per pay check, $3214.38 per year. Blue Cross Blue Shield PPO + Metlife Dental. I have no idea what the deductible or anything is.
  6. What is odd is that he keeps saying "consistency", well here are the most consistent teams: Current NCAA streaks: Kansas: 21 (1990 - 2010) Duke: 15 (1996 - 2010) Michigan State: 13 (1998 - 2010) Gonzaga, Texas, Wisconsin: 12 As a Wisconsin fan, I constantly see my team underrated. So im not even sure what overrated would mean. The guy who is saying the Big 10 is overrated and inconsistent didnt even mention Wisconsin. That is how underrated they are.
  7. I dont see a problem with a 6-6 finish. Its not like there is any award for the conference who wins.
  8. In a free society people are going to die because of the bad decisions by other free people of that society. People will always have the choice and ability to cause destruction and death. No govt. can stop it, no matter how oppressive or free. So I accept that there will be tragedy or death, because that is inevitable. Is freedom worth it? I think yes, but I understand the other position.
  9. If you have an outdoor animal it should be chipped. A collar can fall off, even a chip doesnt mean that the person will actually look for it and scan it. Unfortunately some people do not make the best judgments when putting down animals.
  10. QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 04:32 PM) So what's the line then? What if the TSA decides that due to recent terrorist chatter, they're now going to perform random body cavity searches. Too far? Or are we going to use this bulls*** "well there are other modes of travel" excuse? I seriously find it baffling that people are ok with this. A metal detector is one thing. But being fondled just to get on a stupid plane is another. And I don't buy this nonsense that it's just like an x-ray. First, it's not just like an xray, it's basically a naked picture of your body that you KNOW is going to be out there in public by some creepy perv. And second, an x-ray is PRIVATE, between you and your healthcare provider. There's a reason we protect the s*** out of our medical information, including x-rays, because it's PRIVATE information. If this was the ONLY option to protect us from the dips***s out there trying to blow us up, then fine. But it's not. So it shouldn't be tolerated. I agree with you. The problem is our Supreme Court does not. So as a practical matter, how do you propose we get rid of Scalia, Alito, Roberts and Thomas? Because they consistently have sided with the govt in terms of expanding the govt's power and decreasing the rights of people.
  11. Its been our thinking since 1991 at least, which is far before terrorism was even a buzz word. There are consequences to a conservative controlled Supreme Court, one of them is that they do not really believe in "criminal" rights. So they have no problem making arguments that "criminals" have no expectation of privacy so anything goes. I entirely disagree with it, but to act like this is because of terrorism completely ignores that basically the same issue was decided by the Supreme Court 20 years ago. This is about govt control and we lost the battle decades ago, and the current court would probably like to take away more protections if it gets the chance.
  12. Well Florida v. Bostick is pretty clear; http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/89-1717.ZS.html So all you have to do is change: Thus if the encounter had taken place in an airport terminal, it would not be a seizure. As long as the person can say no to the search and walk away, it should be perfectly legal under Bostick as it is a "consensual search". Well according to Scalia's logic law abiding citizens dont have to be concerned because they have nothing to hide. I disagree with Scalia on almost every opinion of his that I have read, so youll get no argument from me. But I cant deny that right now Scalia is on the side that most likely will get to write the law, and in that case expect it to be written in a way that you lose substantial rights to the govt.
  13. I dont love the policy, but its going to be hard to argue against it on constitutional grounds. There already is a sliding scale for protection, you have less rights in your car than in your house, you have less rights on the street than in your car. With the current Supreme Court, there is no way this will ever be a problem. Im pretty sure that Scalia believes that criminals have no right to privacy because if youre committing a crime you had no expectation of privacy. They have given the green light to various other actions that slowly have eroded search and seizure protections. As a practical matter, its a hassle and inefficient, but do I really want to taking flights to be risky because its more convenient? The only reason to want less security would be to bring drugs on vacation. And even I dont believe thats the best argument against more intrusive scans.
  14. Yeah Hell Kitchen cast has been weak, but I still enjoy the show. Also The Event has been pretty solid, havent heard many people talk about it.
  15. This is one of those plans that is going to end really poorly for some one politically. If they privatize the UW system, you would have to think that the first thing the private company will want to do is raise in-state tuition or accept more out of state students. When you have some one paying $20k versus some one paying $5k for the same benefit, you wonder why you cant just charge more people $20k.
  16. What? Wisconsin was still trying to score when there was a FULL HALF to be played and you are saying thats running up the score? Im sorry but you dont shut down your team with 30 minutes of game to be played, that is ridiculous. Not only that, but if they were running up the score the final drive you posted wouldnt have taken 4:30 minutes on 8 plays. That is an average of half a minute per play, meaning that they were letting the clock run down every single time and keeping the clock moving. I can see if Wisconsin was airing it out in the fourth quarter under 10 minutes, but come on, there was a full half.
  17. How did Wisconsin run up the score? They ran the ball for 337 yards, they scored on a bootleg with their 4th string QB not even being touched. There was one play where Budmayr (back up qb) threw a deep ball for a TD on a third down play with over 7 minutes left to go. The previous TD was on an interception return. Should they have kneeled the ball the entire game? And against Minnesota they went for 2 in a situation where they probably didnt need to, Im not sure thats running up the score.
  18. No oval, no vote. I think that is pretty clear because it says they must fill in the oval AND.
  19. I think there is a very easy argument that its unclear. Im not sure if its a winning argument, but I would have no problem raising the argument. Basically the legislature could have stated that the last name must be spelled exactly as it appears on state documents or the write-in declaration. The legislature did not specify that, or more accurately didnt understand how to write a subclause and accidentally made a restriction only apply to the first subclause and not the second subclause. Either way only the first subclause has any indication that there must be an exact match, the second subclause merely states they must write their last name. It does not say that it must be exact to count.
  20. Law doesnt exactly say what youre interpreting: The problem is how the law is written and that you have to break apart the subclauses. Part 11 has multiple subclauses but for our purpose only " shall be counted if the oval is filled in for that candidate and if the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided" is important. A vote shall be counted if, any of the following occurs: If the name as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy is written in the space provided OR If the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided. Now the first subsection sounds like it has to be written exactly as it appears on the write-in declaration. The second subsection you could argue that because it does not explicitly say that the last name must match the write-in declaration or must match the persons last name in the records of the state, etc, you could argue that the legislative intent was to give some leeway for voter intent. Furthermore we are not seeing the whole picture, a statute is just words. It is the case law that will dictate the interpretation of the statute. There may or may not be prior case law on this statute, but the case law would be the most important factor here. The words only mean what the law interprets them to mean, and a Supreme Court Judge in AK could easily state that their reading of this clause allows for simple spelling mistakes of the last name. That the intent of the statute was to merely give guidance on what votes should be counted, not what votes should be discounted. Whatever the case may be, there is a lot more to this case then just what the statute says. I have no idea and I dont have free access to AK case law (I doubt you guys are going to front the research costs), so I can only speculate.
  21. Strangely I havent consistently watched 1 show on the Democrat list and I watch a considerable amount of tv. Its staggering, Ive only maybe seen an episode of 1 or 2 of the shows. Conversely on the Republican side there are multiple shows that I have seen every single episode.
  22. Yeah they should be playing better. I didnt think theyd win 70, but to lose a game when your up 20 is pretty hard. Going to be a long season for the South Beach Heat.
×
×
  • Create New...