illinilaw08

QUOTE(SnB @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 02:42 PM) I think his role right now is perfect for him. We can use him for a pinch runner in late and close games and also use him to give several guys a rest. Plus he doesn't seem to mind not batting everyday, that average hasn't dipped in a month it seems like. Agree with this 100%. Playing Pablo a couple times a week maxamizes what he does well and minimizes the damage he does in the field (for as bad as Pods is in LF, he is still marginally better than Pablo). Also, as SnB mentioned, the ability to hit consistently without being an everyday player is a rare skill, keep Pablo doing what he's doing.

LOST is the best drama and The Office the best comedy. *Note- I dont get HBO (yet) so while I recognize Entourage, Curb and Sopranos as fantastic shows, I didnt include them. Furthermore, Rescue Me is a pretty decent show, but like SnB said, I have a hard time remembering that it's on (same problem I have with it's always sunny in philadelphia... must be an FX thing)

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 11:20 AM) This goes back a LONG way. Nobody talks about it since he was on the Bulls, but some of the games the Bulls won because of Jordan getting the calls were as bad and worse than what you see now. I don't know how you'd fix this problem either, it's been happening for decades. To clarify, I didnt say that it didnt go back to Jordan, I was just focusing on more recent events and IMO general consistency of officiating is the greatest hurdle for the league. Deferring to superstars for calls is laughable and the exact same reason many American sports fans claim to dislike soccer what with the diving and all.

I dont honestly believe there is a fix, but the deference superstars in the NBA get is ridiculous. I do however think that officals easily can dictate a game. The stillshots show there was contact, but when the play is shown at full speed, the contact is minimal. The worse call in my mind was the non-backcourt call against Wade earlier in the possession. The real problem here is NBA officiating as a whole. Far too often they are able to dictate the way a game is played. Look no further than the Heat-Bulls series where the way officials handled Shaq had a major impact on games. NBA officals need a lot greater consistency throughout the game regardless of who has the ball and how convincing they can make contact appear.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 11:41 PM) I dont know how many times Wade got the sissiest foul calls on him while Dirk and Terry were super harrassed and didnt get the same calls. That being said I dont really care who wins but it would be nice if the refs would call the game the same for both teams rather give Wade special treatment. Yeah, I agree with that. As good of a player as Wade is, he kind of reminds me of an Italian soccer player, everytime he gets hit it's an ordeal. With that being said, Wade = clutch, go Dallas the rest of the way

http://www.collegehumor.com/movies/1661872/ Best movie ever

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 09:58 PM) I'm a bit late, but I wanted to mention that I considered the Italy-US game to have been excellent. Anyone think Italy will beat the Czechs? Well, the Czechs have had some problems with injuries and cards that the Italians will not have to deal with. Also, I think the Italians will not have a difficult time getting up for the Czechs after the draw with the US. I think both games Thursday morning will be spectacular and I just wish a bar in Champaign would open that early so I could watch both games that morning. That being said, it may be better the bars not open that early, have to save myself for the drive back to Chicago for Sox-Cards that night.

Ok, adding my .02 to this discussion. After attempting to drink away all I learned in Con Law I, I hope I can still be helpful. There is no way the SC could rule an amendment unconstituional. First of all, consider what an amendment is, it is a change to the constitution which can only be accomplished under very strict criteria (2/3 of both houses, 3/4 of the states). Since this is how the constitution dictates amendments are passed, the Court would have to rule that that portion of the constitution is unconstitutional in order to overturn an amendment. From a textual standpoint, Article III Section II of the Constitution says that the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction “in all cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be a party.” Suit involving an amendment would not fall under that category. Article III goes on to say “in all other Cases before mentioned the S.C. shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.” This is the portion of the Constitution that Marshall used when he created "judicial review" which is not even in the Constitution, but is rather a judicially created standard of review. Judicial review holds that the Supreme Court has the power to interpret federal laws and determine if they are in conflict with the Constitution. However, checks and balances dictate that judicial review is not the end of the road, much like the legislature can override an executive veto, the legislature can override a judicial veto by amending the Constitution. Thus, the ability of the legislature to amend is the only realistic check available to the legislature (historically the only other check was when FDR threatened to add justices to the SC if they continued to strike down his New Deal policies as unconstitutional). Now, the Supreme Court has the power to interpret amendments, one needs look no further than the evolution of the 4th Amendment to see that, but they would not be able to blatantly rule an amendment to the constitution as against the constitution because once, ratified, an amendment IS the constitution. The thing to remember in all of this is that the Constitution is not incredibly specific. The world has changed a lot since the Constitution was created and as such, you will not find a specific section that explicitly says "court challenges of amendments are not allowed." Instead, you need to interpret the Constitution as a whole, and like I mentioned earlier, the fact that the Constitution makes amending the Constitution to be a task that involves 2/3 of both houses and 3/4 of the states, a rather difficult task, makes a constitutional amendment beyond the scope of judicial review. My apologies for the length of the post, and congratulations to all that are still reading at this point. As an added disclaimer, I only got a B+ in constitutional law, so take that as it is.

Jon Garland with a hell of an effort, here's hoping that he has figured it out this year

QUOTE(BFirebird @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 02:34 PM) wait..how many in a row has Garland retired? I missed what Hawk said. 13

Real nice play by Juan Uribe

Yeah, I think this is a pretty solid lineup, here's hoping the Count is lights out tonight. Since the CUbs arent being very helpful vs. detroit, the sox just need to keep winning games and winning serieses.

QUOTE(Jimbo @ Jun 17, 2006 -> 04:40 PM) How does the US get to the 2nd round now?? Beat Ghana and Italy beat Czech Republic.

Yeah, DJ has really grown on the job, going into last year I really couldn't stand him, nowhe is an excellent color guy and a good complement to Hawk.

QUOTE(DonkeyKongerko @ Jun 17, 2006 -> 04:11 PM) When the numbers were even, I'd have to say the US looked the better side. The last 20 minutes or so, they were just exhausted. I can't believe Arena didn't use his 3rd substitute at that point. Agreed, I was shocked he didnt sub in Eddie Johnson for McBride at around the 81st minute when it looked like McBride was just running on fumes, you have the substitution, use it! On the red cards, Pope was rightfully sent off, Mastroeni was not, that was a brutal red card. The Beasley goal should have been disallowed, McBride was in the offside position and was screening the goalie. That being said, the referee was terrible and the Americans did look like the better side when the numbers were even. If the US plays like this against Ghana, they have a good chance to win that game. Also, big props to Kasey Keller who came up with a couple huge saves at the end.

QUOTE(DonkeyKongerko @ Jun 17, 2006 -> 12:53 PM) Yeah, those saves by Kingston could turn out to be huge. Even if the US wins today, they will probably still be in last due to differential. But if the US wins today, they will at least control their own destiny. At this point, 2 wins guarantees that they advance. The US desperately needs to at least draw today, because goal differential is definitely not in their favor.

Peter Cech standing on his head right now keeping the Czech's in the game, incredible performance. Right after I type that Mutari buries one. 2-0 Ghana.

Wow, Ghana-Czech Republic getting very interesting. Ghana hits the post on a PK, Czech's get a red card and playing down a man, really crazy game here... GO GHANA

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 09:02 PM) I'm very disappointed in our pitchers right now. Well, with Tracey gone, you can't have Montero just come in and bean someone cause you still need at least one inning worth of outs. Cotts, Thornton, Jenks, BMac still in the pen. I'm dissapointed that Tracey didnt do his job, will be interesting to see if Thornton gets called on to do the same in the bottom half of the 8th.

Did Tracey have a job to do and not get it done? Missing Blalock with the one pitch where he came inside?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 08:39 PM) That was just embarassing. How can you go out like that? At least go down swinging. :headshake Exactly, knowing that warnings have been issued and therefore a pitcher is less likely to go inside, you have to be looking away. Even though those pitches to Crede were a little bit off the plate, this team needs to drop the victim mentality tonight and make their own luck. This is a frustrating game sometimes.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 08:32 PM) How long would a pitcher be suspended if he drilled a Ranger? And can we afford to have Thornton bean someone? If anyone is going to bean someone, it should be Tracey because honestly, he's the most expendable of the Sox pitchers

QUOTE(shoota @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 08:30 PM) I'm not impressed with Mackowiak. You know what you are getting with Mack though, he's not going to hit .300, he's not going to play gold glove defense, but he is a streaky hitter who can play a lot of positions, though he is best suited for the corner OF positions... a great guy to have coming off the bench.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 08:23 PM) Did I just hear an F bomb? I heard "Get back on the mound" and "f*** you" after some Padilla theatrics when he didnt get strike 3 vs. Thome I'm guessin the Comcast mike picked up some Sox dugout chatter there. Now how about getting some runs to back that talk up guys.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 08:11 PM) How hard do Tracey and Montero throw? Dye would have had that. Furthermore, if this game gets further out of hand, Tracey or Montero will be sacrificed to the baseball gods and will be plunking a Ranger hitter. And I am convinced that Padilla doesnt hit AJP twice on accident. Defense really helping Javy out right now.... dammit Gooch