tvc184

R4. 2-6 R2. 3-4 P incomplete. 4-4. Receiver got 2 yards past defender but overthrown

Screen 5. 2-5 R1. 3-4 P5. 1-10 at Nederland 31

Nederland fumbles kickoff at own 20 but recovers. 1-10 Nederland

10:16

At 10:47 in 1st

Wos 7-0

R touchdown

Motion 1-15 pass into good coverage for 1-goal at 2

P8 2-2 R15 1-10 at Nederland 3

Kickoff returned to wos 47 1-10 Wos

Nederland to kick.

Festivities starting. Intro to cheerleaders..... i guess the season will get off on time.

I hear you and you have the constitutional right to pray where you want but unfortunately they have the authority to have a person removed or arrested for trespassing. I quit donating to the RC a long time ago. I used to give regularly for years but they crossed the line for me more than once. I know they help some people but I didn't like their policies and way they chose who and when to hand out their services.

Had donuts for me.............

Like the then Justice of the Peace?

The last time that I went dove hunting, I thought the game warden was going to arrest me.

This is not really hard to follow but I will type slowly....... This was my post that hippy was agreeing with on Arnold getting his job back....... >>>>>I am not sure which of his fellow officers that you spoke with but I spoke to several and they all supported him. Maybe we know a different group of officers............. An arbitrator gave Arnold his job back saying that his rights were denied. The city paid him off to leave. A copy of Bartman's ruling states,....... "The grievant is exonerated on all charges. The city of Orange, Texas violated state and federal law when it deprived Capt. Arnold of his 'due process rights.' The indefinite suspension is reversed and the disciplinary reinstatement of Captain Arnold is so ordered. As to remedy, he will be restored to his position and made whole for all benefits and credits in accordance with Texas Local Government Code 143.053(f)."<<<<< As I stated, Arnold won his arbitration and when the city appealed, they paid him $600,000 not to come back. If the city was sure of a victory on appeal, why pay him more than half a million dollars in settlement? They gave him 10 year's salary to agree to not get his job back. Of course the city could have rolled the dice and gone to a trial but I think they saw the writing on the wall that they very well might have to give him back pay and reinstate him so they paid him off... which is exactly what I stated in my first post. You stated in a post that I quoted that his fellow officers did not support him. I disagreed as I know most of his fellow officers and several told me differently. You then posted the above article to back up your premise This is a quote from your article that you have cited to back up your statement. "Several officers dropped in to support Arnold.". So let's see, you say that he didn't get his job back but I say that he did and the city settled with him to not come back. His firing was never upheld. You also stated that his fellow officers did not support him and then you cite an article that refutes you own statement and backs up mine that his fellow officers did support him. Thanks for the confirmation.

Here is Obama saying that Bush was "unpatriotic" because he added $4 Trillion to the national debt. In comes the patriotic Obama to save the day!! ...... and added $11 Trillion to the debt. Let's see, Bush adds $4 Trillion and Obama adds $11 Trillion. Hmmm.......... If you add almost three times as much in the same time frame, are you three times as unpatriotic? Hillary says no worry, I am here to keep Obama's legacy going.

I am not sure which of his fellow officers that you spoke with but I spoke to several and they all supported him. Maybe we know a different group of officers............. An arbitrator gave Arnold his job back saying that his rights were denied. The city paid him off to leave. A copy of Bartman's ruling states,....... "The grievant is exonerated on all charges. The city of Orange, Texas violated state and federal law when it deprived Capt. Arnold of his 'due process rights.' The indefinite suspension is reversed and the disciplinary reinstatement of Captain Arnold is so ordered. As to remedy, he will be restored to his position and made whole for all benefits and credits in accordance with Texas Local Government Code 143.053(f)."

I have criticized several officers. As far as the officer in Orange I backed him up completely then and now. I don't know what happened but I read every witness statement and said there simply was no case.... and there wasn't.

I read the article. Of course it is an article and not the report itself but some of that stuff is slanting it far to one side and take some things way out of context. One such example is 60 complaints of racial slurs. The time period is over 6 years so 60 complaints in maybe 80 months. Of course every incident is not reported but even in these, it lists no evidence of verification, only the allegation. So 9 times a year, the DOJ has found an allegation of a " the N word" in a department of more than 3,000 officers. They apparently use that as evidence rampant racism. I have seen such a complaint within my own agency. It was many years ago in my career but it was about using that most offensive slur. Three people filed the complaint. The complaint was against a black officer and after being interviewed again since the officer's story was different, they each admitted making up the story to get the officer in trouble. Obviously that doesn't make any Baltimore accusation false but it is easy to accuse when no evidence is required. I have personally seen such accusations that were outright lies. Even fairly recently I was called in to witness such an allegation against an officer made to internal affairs. What the person that was complaining didn't know was that the whole thing was on video. He made 3-4 distinct allegations and every one was false. So the DOJ comes up with 60 accusations in 80 months from 3,000 officers. That comes out to an average of one complaint per month for every 4,000 officers. Even if every complaint was valid, it hardly speaks of sone out of control situation. Reduced to mathematical terms, that is 99.98% of officers each month not being complained on for using the racial slur. I agree that to do so is highly unprofessional and should be dealt with. When their evidence is that more than 99.9% of officers each month are not getting complained on I have to wonder about the extent of his problem as claimed. There are other parts of the article that seem to have a problem with the accusations by the DOJ. They are adding 2 + 2 and trying to come up with 9.625. Their math/logic just isn't working.

Merely suggesting it is not any crime in TX that I know of. In Mississippi? Maybe but I don't know their law. To do so in front of people that then start doing it can probably be charged as Riot.

The Great Divider has not caused but empowered the freaks, loons and morons to come of age. They were always there but not glorified. We can now claim that we are now another sex without the need for an actual change, get a stuffed dog and claim it as a service animal, have days/parades to proclaim a sexual preference, have a presidential election where the two parties selected a felon and a reality show host as candidates, etc.

See, therein lies the problem. At least six of your seven "70's" bands are from the 60's. Because you listened to some of their hits in the 70's........ I guess the Rolling Stones are a band of the millennium since they are still out there. But, at least the Eagles didn't start until the 70's had at least begun, even if briefly. I grew up in the 70's or at least my high school and early adulthood years but the 60's made the vinyl go 'round.

I guess so but that isn't a citation. Driving down a lane is not illegal but going through a red light is. Going through without the proper tag is (again) a civil violation. The fee is not to the driver but the vehicle owner for non-payment. In a way it is like not paying a credit card bill. There are also speed cameras however they are illegal in Texas. I think the red light cameras should be. I think they are unconstitutional but it would need someone with the money to fight it and a lawyer good enough to make the case.