bullets13

I agree. I guess my point was more about how it shouldn’t have even been an option in the first place. The Ags got screwed, momentum came to a standstill, and anyone with two brain cells knew this was going to be the outcome. Even if they get the win through a forfeit the situation was detrimental to their season to some degree

Everybody hates on CardinalBacker, but he's hit the nail on the head when he talks about people ignoring a lot of really bad behavior/poor performance and circling the wagons around Trump. we're seeing more of it in this thread, including the continual deflection/pretending that the whole Epstein thing is an effort to get at Trump. I'm with you completely on the ideas that 1) this is much bigger than Trump (although if the ish sticks to him let him wear it) and 2) he's handled the whole situation horribly, shielding powerful people just as Biden did (either actively or through omissions and redactions).

allowing players to play with pending litigation sets a really bad precedent. obviously, I'm no aggie fan, but they were on a fantastic run before losing to Bama. Bediako didn't do anything crazy in the game against the Ags, but he put up a few points and boards, a block, and provided 19 minutes of 7-ft-tall rim protection. the Ags lost a game by 3 that they may have won had he not played. They've now lost 3 straight. Not only is it conceivable that Bediako being allowed to play changed the course of that game, it could be fairly reasonably argued that it changed the course of their season to some degree as well. Even if the ags get that win back through a forfeit, it doesn't do anything to remedy the poorer form they've been in since the loss, and i assume the committee would have an asterisk by a forfeited win as well when considering tourney seeding.

Not sure where I got the info from at the time, as the post you're quoting is from 5 years ago. I said i got it from an article, but obviously I don't remember where the article was from at this point.

As a somewhat moderate conservative, I feel voter ID laws is the most common-sense thing that can be done to ensure the integrity of our elections. Eliminating mail-in options for anyone who's not overseas in the military would help a lot as well.

KFDM is currently running the poll "Are you satisfied with the DOJ's handing of the release of the Jeffery Epstein files?" Their poll results always skew very conservative, so it's really telling that currently 72% of respondents have chosen "no."

Feels like Tarkington has figured something out, but may be too little too late

I think you were right

but why? I voted for them some for a couple of cycles back before I had legitimate financial responsibilities. Now that I have real bills and children, I vote exclusively right, although I don't disagree with a lot of stuff that CB says on here.

It has me listed as a "stressed sideliner". Along with yourself, I'd be a libertarian if there was any traction with that movement, but I do more than just lean right when voting. 15 years ago I'd vote either party depending on the candidate, but these days I don't ever vote left in state or national elections.

[Hidden Content]

This one is indefensible, which is why nobody is commenting in here. It's highly unlikely he watched the whole video before reposting it, but that's irrelevant. If you're the president of the United States you better check what you post before you hit send. If I'd posted the same video last night I would've been fired before I made it into work this morning.

I've never liked Trump. People would argue with me when I said that he doesn't care about America, he only cares about Trump. That's becoming more and more obvious. I voted for him because the alternative was so awful, and because I thought he did a decent job his first time in office, even if i felt his reasoning for doing so was self-serving. This time he had an easy setup to do a decent job again and keep the right in control for at least the next 8 years, and he's more worried about himself than making that happen. I haven't researched the Schumer tunnel deal, but either way it's bad. He's either holding money for crucial infrastructure hostage, or he's willing to blow $16B in tax dollars on an unnecessary project in order to try to get things named after him. I'm not sure which is worse. Not to mention he's saying even crazier and more offensive stuff than he did his first time in office, has managed to turn a mandate to fix immigration into something that's somehow helping the dems regain power (despite them acting like unhinged loons), and the economy has not been noticeably better than it was under Biden. 8 years of JD Vance doesn't seem like the foregone conclusion it did a year ago when everyone was absolutely sick of the woke left. Now the needle has swung back to people rallying around hating Trump again.

We put everything on our southwest card, then pay it off every month. On the rare occasion our spending outpaces our income for a month we have plenty in savings and still pay it off for the month. We haven't paid for a flight in years, and we fly a couple of times a year, on average.

you're delusional if you think they aren't. they're encouraging it. and you have a short memory if you're criticizing the right for "celebrating people being attacked and executed."

depends on the qb, as others have stated. they have a couple of early games that they could lose if he struggles to find his rhythm at the varsity level. WOS will be a favorite against them, and if HF can find some linemen they're going to have the skill players to give them a tough game as well.

Thats insane.

schools don't handle criminal assaults. this isn't some fistfight between a couple of kids.

should settle some debates.

Hamshire Fannett: Week 1: La Marque Week 2: @Vidor Week 3: LCM Week 4: @Stafford Week 5: @Hitchcock

It was stacked this year.

my buddy who lives in austin calls it "performative outrage." seems like a pretty perfect term for it.

she also wasn't going through the window at that time. we can go back and forth about what ifs and why nots. still won't change my opinion that it was an easily justified, although decidedly ugly shooting.

that actually could have something to do with why they didn't fire. the officer who fired was able to do so at an angle where he had a wall as a backdrop behind his target. If the officers from behind the mob had fired they would've been sending bullets into the room that the other officers were trying to protect.

that's wild.