Jump to content

hornian

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    3601
  • Joined

Everything posted by hornian

  1. Hi Kyle! Those were some fun games out in Right Field yelling at him. I still remember the absolute froze rope he threw from right field to get a baserunner out at 3rd.
  2. This. I’m a lawyer, and a litigator at that. We have in our statutes and case law things called “rebuttable presumptions” meaning things that are generally true in most cases, so the law presumes that is the case. An example that springs to mind and might be easy to grasp is the speed limit - if you drive at or under the speed limit there’s a rebuttable presumption you were driving safely. But if the conditions mean it would be dangerous to drive the speed limit you can be cited for unsafe driving and the police can testify about what facts led them to determine driving the speed limit was unsafe. However, it’s rebuttable - so if you show how the facts of your specific case don’t align with the presumption, it not only can be rebutted (like the speed limit), it literally no longer has any legal weight. You can just argue “but I was going under the speed limit,” you’d have to prove that your speed in those conditions didn’t create an unsafe situation. The judge or jury has to look at the facts and make an informed decision given those facts, and can’t give any weight to the speed limit on the road. I’m eating breakfast on my way to the courthouse this morning to go and do something similar - prove that my client’s bank accounts were inherited, and therefore rebutting the presumption that the funds in those accounts are community property. I have very little doubt the judge will look at the facts and stick with the presumption that all property owned by either spouse is community property, because the facts are so clear and the judge understands the application of the law on this point. Once I show the statements with “estate transfer” in them he will realize the community presumption doesn’t apply and look at the facts. If he messes up, I’ll appeal and I’m confident the court of appeals will get it right. Because that’s the way the legal system is supposed to work. However in too much public discourse, there’s no such thing as a rebuttable presumption. A person makes a determination based on a belief (flawed or not), and that’s it. It’s either black or white, true or false, wrong or right. It doesn’t matter if you show them facts that their determination was wrong, or perhaps there is an exception to it. They get locked in and refuse to engage. And while that’s fine for some things that don’t impact society as a whole (OU sucks, no facts will change my mind about that), it’s horrible for many others that extend beyond your own personal sphere of influence (I’m scared of needles, so all vaccines must be terrible). In other words, too many people aren’t willing to be persuaded that their position isn’t supported by the facts. My dad used to tell me “your rights end where mine begin” when I was being a little shit to him about one thing or another and claimed it was my right as an American to say what I want or what have you; and while it’s pretty simplistic, it’s also not too far off from the golden rule (which I also happen to think is a pretty good one). But that sounds a lot like empathy, which is also in pretty short supply these days
  3. Man, I think this hits it squarely on the head as to why I started this thread. If college students these days are this ... regressive (I guess?) socially speaking, it feels like we are setting ourselves up for a real different experience for my kids and grandkids. I remember being in high school and college and reading about the Scopes Monkey Trials and thought "man, what idiots, who would ever push that stupid religious-based science to be taught in schools when we have the Bill of Rights and the separation of church and state." But it looks like my kids will get to live through a new era that is just as ridiculous.
  4. This is a great example of your straw man logic. Topic: Why is the younger generation less tolerant? The rest of the responses: Give reasons they see or believe lead to this, mostly staying out politics (talking about parenting, social media, etc.) Texas Fight: It's actually the professor who is not willing to have her speech suppressed by the government that is wrong!!
  5. If it wasn't for the damn whistler, making a trip to see the Vandy Series would be fun.
  6. Your stance is just flat out wrong. I read the article. I summarized it. My summary was correct. Now, you are twisting that into an "inflammatory summary of the situation" when all of the information you've been provided shows that the summary was in fact correct. And the only reason you find it to be inflammatory is because of made up reasons like "this is kiddie lit there's no need to discuss gender" when the syllabus that was posted shows that the class was intended to have a review of gender in the course, and the stated reason for firing was discussing gender. If the summary of these facts is "inflammatory," it's because of your opinion of the facts. Which is fine, have your own opinion. Also, LOL to your "summary" of my OP calling out a "generation of the population for some mental issue" when I literally started the thread comparing Gen-Z to Karens. I'm pretty sure being a Karen is not a "mental issue" (other than being entitled, but I don't think you'll find that as a diagnosis in the DSM).
  7. I am stating accurately what happened, from the article: So what part of what I wrote is inconsistent with this? Read that, along with the quoted section in the first post where the student complained that the professor was "teaching that there are more than two genders." The professor is apparently going to be disciplined, and the Dean has been fired, for not toeing the line that transgender people don't/should not exist. Is your critique that I typed "LGBT" instead of "transgender" in my initial post? If so, stop being a pedant and maybe try to actually engage in a conversation. Again, my question is what has changed in the last generation that the typically more tolerant generation is the one being the thought police?
  8. True. Although I’m dating myself, I was in undergrad during the Bush II years and I remember a lot of neocons speaking on campus to some fanfare/protests, but no one was trying to get anyone fired for allowing it. Stufents shouting down Ann Coulter comes to mind. Protests about the content of the speaker’s ideals? Sure. Trying to fire the college dean for allowing the speaker? Not so much.
  9. I read this article on the Texas Tribune about an A&M Dean getting fired for not forcing a professor to toe the line and allowing her to teach that LGBT people exist. https://www.texastribune.org/2025/09/08/texas-am-video-professor-student-gender-identity-content/ Putting aside the politics of it, my main take away is that this is because some 18-22 year old undergrad got his or her or their (see what I did there?) feels hurt. I kind of expect this from the older generation. But Gen Z? Being so butt hurt that someone expressed a differnt worldview that they film it and post it online and actively try to get other professor fired? That was surprising to me. Very Karen-esque energy.
  10. Can't let a team across the 50. Everyone knows that. C'mon!
  11. If true, rookie move on telling anyone that he won.
  12. You do realize that Texas players have a tradition (at least going back 2-3 seasons with JBrooks, maybe longer) of a player that is held out for injury of wearing all of their teammates chains on the sidelines, right?
  13. I agree with CTJ. All whites are only storm troopers if the helmet is also white.
  14. hornian

    Florida Gators

    Did you at least get a $20 bud light inspired HJ before she passed out? If not, our brethren out in El Paso have some tips for you.
  15. I’m interested too. This would be an ideal setup in my house.
  16. Didn't know your wife was reviewing your sex life.
  17. This switchover to ESPN Unlimited is frustrating for me. Usually I just sign up for YouTubeTV during the football season, but all I really use it for is for football season. And it's close to/over $100 a month for that. So $30+tax a month was a price I'm willing to pay. My wife was convinced to switch to Verizon managing our Disney (Disney+/Hulu/ESPN) subscription last year, and apparently whatever bundle that is doesn't even have an option for ESPN Unlimited (it's only ESPN+, now ESPN select). However, because that is linked to my username, I can't even seem to get a standalone ESPN Unlimited subscription through ESPN/Disney. I went ahead and canceled through Verizon, but since it's paid ahead, it's still "active" through September 2nd. I also have Spectrum internet, and I was able to allegedly subscribe to ESPN Unlimited through them, and was charged for it, and allegedly have a valid subscription, but I still cannot log in and watch anything on any app or device. Disney+ is no help (there's literally not a way to talk to or chat with anyone about this), and Spectrum hasn't been able to figure it out yet. I'm trying to work it out, so that it's all working before the before the Ohio State game next Saturday, but it's frustrating to say the least.
  18. Time to transfer all my credit line over to my other Chase cards.
  19. Answering my own question, it appears related - the Target shooting was a carjacking. This seems to be the location where the suspect was apprehended.
  20. Is this separate from the Target shooter? It seems like it would be since this is not near Ohlen road.
  21. I know a poster's wife was the victim of an armed robbery in the parking lot a few years back (probably more than a few, probably on TOS).
  22. If so, you need to change thread title to "I inadvertently dug a well by hand."
  23. Tell me you don’t watch Texas Baseball without telling me you don’t watch Texas Baseball.
  24. In the 2nd year of my dynasty, Marcel Reed won the Heisman … after transferring to Ohio State. Would absolutely die of schadenfreude if that happened
×
×
  • Create New...