jv_coach

I have never seen a "River Runs Through It" Know I am intrigued. Ole Red tells the story well on Shawshank Redemption

I am going to have to end this thread. For this ,by far, is the best part of a movie since Walt Disney put sound to film.

My favorite english class in college, and I took several many times over, we would watch movies and write about them and Cool Hand Luke was one of them. Loved the movie.

I found it to be that more times then not they want someone they can control.

Ask this question again in 3-5 years, and that is when we will know.

[Hidden Content]# ByAMANDA PRESTIGIACOMO @amandapresto January 21, 2018 The pro-life movement and the feminist movement could not be more different, and this sharp contrast was on full display over the weekend. For the very first time, I had the opportunity to attend the March for Life in Washington, D.C. The crowds were massive — it’s the largest annual human rights march in the world — and the people were cheerful, warm, and full of joy. The theme of the event was, fittingly: "love saves lives." Families proudly pushed their babies with Down syndrome — an abnormality we, as a society, are urgently told to dispose of — in their strollers with smiles on their faces; former abortion clinic workers held signs proclaiming that life matters; teens chanted about their love for babies and held clever and playful signs; single mothers boasted of the children they chose to keep thanks to pro-life pregnancy centers and religious organizations; a Congresswoman told the masses of the miracle birth of her daughter who was supposed to die upon delivery; and the faithful said prayers aloud in unison and sang church hymns. In stark contrast, just one day later, feminists and their soy latte-drinking allies took to the streets for the Women’s March. (I was not in D.C. to catch the official march, but I was in NYC, which held a large Women's March gathering.) The women were a combination of young virtue-signaling non-victims who long to see themselves as victims, and their elders: women who have followed the rules of feminism and ended up in despair; scorned, alone, and angry. Apparently, not getting the memo to #resist transphobia, there were more than enough women rocking so-called "###### hats" to make you want to vomit. Their vulgar signs — many depicting the poop emoji with Trump's hair, vaginas, and penises — and chants called for President Donald Trump’s impeachment for various reasons, none of which were compelling nor grounded in reality and facts. The theme of the event, from what I could gather: buck democracy and oust our duly elected president and kill as many babies as possible in the name of Feminism. Mind you, this march was toned-down dramatically from last year, when Madonna spoke about her dreams of blowing up the White House and Ashley Judd engaged in painful slam-poetry about her period (among other nonsense).

I taught her how to block out, foul and miss freethrows. Everything else she learned on her own.

Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.

they still got a long ways to go, and Cinderella they aint.

four teams in with a five team district.

Well that is like arguing over which one of Cinderella's step-sisters is better looking.

We did not know no better. Looking back though it is a sweet memory.

yes.

Huntington basketball is like Huntington football. Pathetic.

[Hidden Content]

As you know, PragerU’s videos are available on a number of platforms, one of which is YouTube. And as you may also know, YouTube has chosen repeatedly to restrict some of our videos for violating their “Community Guidelines.” Those guidelines are meant to protect users against viewing sexual content, violent or graphic content, and hate speech. As a PragerU viewer, you know as well as I do that our videos contain nothing even remotely close to any of these categories. To date, YouTube has restricted nearly 40 PragerU videos, addressing topics ranging from religion and freedom of speech to the history of the Korean War. More than a year ago, we filed a complaint with YouTube, hoping that there was some kind of innocent mistake. That’s when we were told by YouTube that after reviewing our videos, they determined that they were, indeed, “not appropriate for a younger audience.” Of course, we have this in writing. Think about the millions of actually inappropriate videos on YouTube, and then ask yourself, “Why is our content restricted?” Unfortunately, the answer is rather obvious, isn’t it? YouTube has restricted PragerU videos for only one reason: ideological discrimination. Of course, YouTube is owned by Google, which was founded to, ironically, “Organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.” YouTube has made some of our most important videos inaccessible to the very audience PragerU seeks to reach: young people. Let me be clear: they don’t like what we teach, and so they intend to stop us from teaching it. This kind of censorship is what we have seen on college campuses for years. But it is far more dangerous in this circumstance, because the internet is where the world goes to get informed. Can you imagine if the left owned the internet the way they own our universities? Can you imagine what the world would look like if Google is allowed to continue to arbitrarily censor ideas they simply don’t agree with? Well, this is why Prager University filed suit against YouTube and Google. We are not fighting this only for PragerU—we are taking this on for America and possibly the world.

I grew up not far from a group of brothers , four of them, and my sister and I would spend countless summer days and after school hours at there house playing football or baseball. Back in the day we were a bunch of dirty, snot nosed, uncool kids, but in reality Scroggins, Texas may have had the best athletes in wood county ,in what seemed to me at that time the biggest and coolest yard. Sadly they moved away in the sixth grade, but of us six kids I went and played college football at Tarleton State, the brother my age went and played baseball at one of the d2 schools in Arkansas, the next brother went and wrestled and played football in college, my sister just got inducted into the UT Hall of Honor for Basketball, the brother her age was at least all-district (if not district defensive mvp) at Allen high school and got a scholarship at Texas Tech and the youngest brother went and played college football at Trinity University.

Also I heard a story about how this old and tough cattleman, needed some help with a cattle drive so he hired all the boys 14 years and younger to drive the heard. Some cattle rustlers shot the old rancher, but the kids killed all the rustlers and got the cattle to market. I wonder if the father "Texas Jack catch em alive" was part of that group? :)

this was not the norm for back then, but since they did not care about kids feelings back in the day, but rather allowed kids to find their self worth in their accomplishments. Plus the parents expectations for themselves was high and the parents expectations for their kids was high, this feat was able to be done.

link for the article [Hidden Content]

Close-Knit Communities Put the Individual First With no individual rights, there is no meaningful community, and with no community, there is nothing more than every man for himself. by Michael Morris Imagine yourself living in a pre-political moment, where individual rights and, by extension, property rights do not exist. The colony generally respects the things that you claim are yours, but there are a few diabolical people who have little reservation to use force and take what you have worked hard to acquire. In this place, there are no mediating institutions, nothing codified that attempts to define rights, and no titles or deeds. Power is the mediator, and the weaker individuals will stake a claim to property and pray that it is respected. Now, imagine for a moment longer how this system would affect the ability of a community to cohere. Although most people would naturally come to respect your claim, the minority would sow seeds of discord and render cohesion impossible. Neighbors would question the motive of other neighbors. Families would have little way of ensuring land and other valuables would be passed along to future generations. The end result is a quick descent into a zero-sum game where every man is for himself. The Fundamental Nature of Property Rights With no property rights established, we find that next to no other rights can be reasonably protected. There is no enforcement of the right to life if a covetous heel decides he wants what you have. There is no free speech, no right to assemble, no worship if your exercise violates the sensibilities of another who has no reservation regarding the use of force. These are precisely the ingredients that make up a dystopia. With no individual rights, there is no meaningful community, and with no community, there is nothing more than every man for himself. What is the purpose of this thought experiment, you ask? To address a particularly insidious trope that claims libertarian political theory subverts the organization of communities by emphasizing the rights of the individual. Such accusations have been levied from all across the political spectrum and all across the west. The idea goes that if we are all looking out for number one all the time, then we forget about the needs of our neighbors. The end result, in this view, is a quick descent into a zero-sum game where it is every man for himself. Natural Rights Nurture Community When every man knows what he works for is his, then the possibility of social cohesion becomes a reality. The image cast of a pro-individual social order is often used as a political bludgeon on unpopular legislation, from universal healthcare to a bloated welfare state. It invariably requires convincing a large share of voters that the relinquishment of a little more of your fundamental rights is necessary for the common good. Classically understood, defining the rights of the individual was intended to accomplish precisely the opposite of what proponents of statism would have you believe. Man exists before politics and only becomes political as society organizes. Failing to define what areas of a man's existence are his and what belongs to the collective order is a political nonstarter. This dynamic can easily be seen by looking at a first-grade classroom. If a teacher fails to establish the rights of a child by allowing him to call the property on his desk his own, then she will spend her day putting out fires from bickering about whose pencil is whose. She will never teach anything of value to those malleable minds because order was never achieved. In this case, is it true that insisting on both the government and your neighbor to respect your individual rights is bad for society? Could it be that the twenty-five-year-old man making ten dollars an hour is wrong to believe he's getting railroaded by being coerced to pay for programs he will never use? Quite the contrary, civil order is impossible without any lines drawn that preclude the public. When every man knows what he works for is his and, by extension, what he purchases is not subject to the appetites of his surrounding community, the possibility of social cohesion becomes a reality. A system that protects our rights as individuals strengthens the community. Civil Order Flows from the Individual Whether we consider the dynamics at play in a first-grade classroom or the might-makes-rights primitive era, we contend with the same human nature. If order is to be achieved, then it happens through the rights of each person or it does not happen at all. Any view that seeks to realize harmony through common ownership or by enforcing exclusive rights to certain groups is utopian nonsense that will descend into chaos. A system that protects our rights as individuals not only strengthens the community but is actually the system that makes community possible. So much political discontent on display today can be boiled down to neighbors viewing neighbors with contempt for not "paying their fair share." Instead, perhaps neighbors should view the government with the same contempt for taking what doesn't belong to it. By shifting their focus, neighbors can share a cause and work together to achieve the common good that both respects the rights of the individual and values the community. Michael Morris Michael Morris is a husband and dad who lives in Denton, Texas. His essays have appeared in the Federalist, Aleteia, and the Libertarian Catholic. He also helps manage the Facebook page of the Libertarian Catholic. Michael Morris Michael Morris is a husband and dad who lives in Denton, Texas. His essays have appeared in the Federalist, Aleteia, and the Libertarian Catholic. He also helps manage the Facebook page of the Libertarian Catholic.

After the one Bama player shoved the QB's head down on the Georgia sideline I knew that all the calls were going help Alabama from that point on. Add a 15 yard unsportsmanlike and Georgia may have rolled the Tide. But we cant have that.

I thought Obama all ready wore a dress?

The mother is dealing with grief, so I can forgive her. So she needs to see that the man was protecting his family and she needs to accept that her son was wrong and brought all 5 shots upon himself.