Englebert

I have no Nike stuff to burn, but I've been accused of owning some. Where did you think Bluedove acquired that line of thinking? And speaking of idiotic president, we've asked this question so many times on here to the point of absurdity, only to see it go unanswered. Why do you think Trump is an idiot?

I figured since I started employing the Liberal tactic of personal insults then they would think I was an associate.

Are you actually this gullible? Insurance companies used to charge more money for insurance on red cars than non-red cars. There rationale was that more red cards are involved in more accidents than any other color car, therefore, red cars are more dangerous. This line of thinking continued until someone told them that there are more red cars on the road than any other color, and therefore will be involved in more wrecks...not because of the color of the car...but because of the sheer number of red cars. It's something we can all laugh about now...until we read that some people are still employing that flawed logic.

Is a more childish and short-sided statement possible compared to this one? Apparently you are this short-sighted? And apparently you feel that no protest has limits of decorum when it comes to timing or behavior. So according to you, if I want to protest the breakroom policies at my place of work, it is highly appropriate to drop my pants and moon the guests at your wedding. That would be my form of protest that would get attention, and you have no right to get mad that I chose that time, place, and method for staging a protest. Is this really your logic? And what agenda do you think I have? Are you attempting to call me racist again? Does the word pedophile ring a bell in your head?

Exhibit A! Do you think the biased wing-nut Liberal media should be considered a hate group by the SPLC? You are the epitome of the damage the biased media can do to a human brain. Now answer WOSgrad's question...which deserves repeating: "Shot by whom?"

That's exactly what I did...I gave my opinion, but you somehow accuse me of trying to force him to do something. Why do you make stuff up? Most people consider that "lying". And you say I'm free to give my opinion, but then accuse me of stifling rights when I do. What is wrong with you?! And the NFL does have every right to force him to do what they say. They can't throw him in jail for not following their procedures, but they have every right to fire him. Kaepernick's first amendment rights guarantee that the government cannot throw him in jail for his statements. The first amendment does not guarantee him the right not to get fired for his statements. It is a very simple concept that somehow is foreign to many people. You claim to be a nurse. Do your bosses have the right to fire you if you curse at your patients? Do your bosses have a right to fire you if you don't show up for work, even if your excuse for failing to show was due to participating in a protest? Do your bosses have a right to fire you for what they deem as inappropriate behavior? If you are assisting a doctor and he asks for a scalpel, and you take a knee instead, do your bosses have the right to fire you? Does the government have the right to throw you in jail for such actions? Can you see the difference? Now tell me again, does the NFL have the right to tell Kaepernick not to take or knee or risk being fired?

Do you even understand why he is kneeling? If you do (and I would be shocked), check the stats of what he considers overt actions deeming the need to inflame a large number of people. You might be left speechless to learn that you are being led be the nose of a biased media...which probably should be classified as a hate group by now.

It is my call to make. In case you forgot, I also have 1st amendments rights. Why are you trying to stifle MY right of free speech? Do you think I don't have the right to protest something I feel is done to incite hatred?

My reply is about as simplistic an answer as you can get. Sad that you can't even comprehend basic straightforward language. The rest of the board had no problem. I hope the laughter doesn't damage your eardrums. If you are implying that I did not answer your statement or the last question, I have to laughingly reply that was also answered with my reply. Again, simplistic. I do not hold the standards you bestowed on the board, therefore, "by my standards" was never asked, rendering your question moot. Try asking a salient question. It's not a hard concept (well, for most).

I can't answer for the rest, but I don't like the kneeling during the national anthem because using this moment to protest is a provocative act designed to be distasteful to a large amount of people, just to get attention. Kaepernick had/has plenty of other opportunities to voice/express his protest message, but chose the most inflammatory method he could think of. He could have voiced his concerns during the media interviews following games. He could have walked out on the field and taken a knee before kickoff. He could have taken a knee anytime, but he chose to incite division and anger by purposely choosing the anthem. Liberals are the king of this. PETA employs this strategy on a regular basis...a strategy I'm not fond of at all. And I do recall you getting perturbed at me for using this strategy on you.

I bought a pair of Nike shoes about 15 years ago. They lasted a little over a month before falling apart. The company sent me a new pair, which fell apart in a little over 2 months. I've never worn anything Nike again. So no, I don't wear or own any Nike gear. I've been boycotting them for many, many years.

And more for you to ponder Big Girl, in the form of a few little questions: Do you think the Asian workers get paid sick leave, paid holidays, paid vacation days, paid maternity leave, paid paternity leave, 401K or retirement package, paid medical benefits, paid vision benefits, paid dental benefits, stock options, signing bonuses, hazard pay, overtime pay? Do they have a union? Can Nike discriminate based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs? Should we support Nike if any of these are not guaranteed rights to each worker? I quoted you baddog, but my questions are for Big Girl. You or anyone can answer if you wish.

I am almost hoping Trump gets caught in an inappropriate act in the White House with an intern. Personally I don't care, just like I didn't care with ol' Bill, but I want to see the reactions of Liberals. I'm pretty sure some of their heads will explode when they realize they can't berate him for said action, though they still will. The hate and hypocrisy would rise even higher than the current unseen, unheard of, and unprecedented level. Stormy became a celebrity. Monica, a subordinate, became a leper.

I just realized I'm a very rich man. I have 2 dollars in my wallet. That means I have many dollars in my wallet. I'm going to Disneyland. Might as well dive headfirst into the world of fantasy.

When you have a "D" behind your name, you don't need to worry about being arrested. Just one example (out of many, many, many): [Hidden Content] Do you remember the criminal trial for Timothy Geithner? Me either.

By your standards, NFL players are not protesting police corruption when they kneel, they are showing respect for the departed. Is this really your interpretation, or just another case of you badly attempting to denigrate and stereotype non-minorities? Do you like the world of hate you live in? Do you like displaying that hate?

Did you even read this garbage before posting the link. I'm guessing no, because if you had you would have been too embarrassed to post this biased trash. The article attempts to equate wholesale governmental corruption because of two people's past actions that has nothing to do with corruption. We can find much, much, much worse in the Obama administration, which somehow and mysteriously is absent from the author's analysis. The author is rife with TDS, and anyone believing this garbage must be also. Would you care to defend the author's contentions in this article? Please, oh please say yes.

1. Beaumont West Brook/Bellaire 2. Silsbee/Port Neches-Groves 3. Joaquin/Deweyville 4. Hamshire-Fannett/Hughes Springs 5. Galena Park North Shore/Katy 6. Houston St. Pius X/Beaumont United 7. Deer Park/Port Arthur Memorial 8. Crosby/New Caney 9. Friendswood/Dayton 10. Magnolia/Barbers Hill 11. Montgomery/Vidor 12. Cleveland/Buna 13. Nederland/West Orange-Stark 14. Bridge City/Diboll 15. Coldspring-Oakhurst/Hardin-Jefferson 16. Huntington/Warren 17. Little Cypress-Mauriceville/Woodville 18. Tarkington/Anahuac 19. Houston KIPP GC/Orangefield 20. East Chambers/Kountze 21. Kirbyville/Newton 22. Beaumont Legacy Christian/Hardin 23. Evadale at Houston Northland Christian 24. Pasadena First Baptist/Sabine Pass 25. Houston Mt. Carmel/High Island

I love the last sentence, which is precisely my initial thought when reading this: Last sentence: "So you have the Trump DOE (accidentally) inflating the number of school shootings and NPR setting the record straight. I wouldn’t have predicted either part of that happening." I would go even further and say I would have predicted that the Trump DOE would have actually did due diligence in getting accurate numbers, and NPR inflating the numbers. My faith in government numbers stays the same (just south of zero), while my faith in NPR has heightened substantially (up to zero).

If Tiger Woods is not Black then why did so many people get so upset about Fuzzy Zoeller's fried chicken joke?

It's not hard to guess who you think is the villain in any and every scenario. And it's laughable that you constantly stereotype then accuse others of stereotyping.

Since Aggies claim a National Championship in 1939, we can assume that the "small military school" is no longer an excuse from that time, especially considering Aggies claim a 1919 National Championship. From 1940 to 1974 the series is Texas 31-3-1. So that "small military school" claim might hold water in the 1800s, but that would include only a few of the early games. I'm not sure it even holds water then considering Texas started it's football program in 1893 while A&M started theirs just a year later.

When I say is this necessary, I mean do I need to know the sexual orientation of a superhero? If my house is burning down, do I need to know the sexual orientation of the fireman saving my house? If I'm drowning, do I need to know the sexual orientation of my rescuer? If I'm watching an action movie, do I need to know the sexual orientation of the hero? So my question is, why does Hollywood think I need to know the sexual orientation of a superhero? Is her preference pertinent to the plot of the movie? If so, fine. But an action movie in which sex scenes are 99.9% of the time gratuitous. I grew up not knowing the sexual orientation of any superhero, much less any hero. Why does Hollywood find the need to force this down my throat? [Hidden Content] I have no problem with the sexual orientation of the character or the sexual orientation of the actor. My question is, why am I forced to know? And related to a recent topic on here, is the motivation for this revelation a product of general information, or is it injected as a sole purpose of pissing off a certain group of people?

I'm not sure what the good fight is, although you apparently do. I'll just keep posting and you can label my posts however you want. Maybe I will complain about the ridiculousness of them.

So that's why you asked my intentions. You want desperately to disparage me, since I had the audacity to question you. Apparently you still resort to the same ol' thing of complaining about something without offering any reasoning or rationale for your complaint. If you want to label having a debate or discussion as "playing the game", then that's fine with probably everyone. Complaining without explanation for the complaint is in no way shape or form a discussion, but more along the lines of attempted stifling. Am I am a little lot baffled about your proclamation of being "right" about the last article. Was someone wrong? What were you right about?