Jump to content

sheeeit

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    760
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sheeeit

  1. I know this makes me a bad person but these are my favorite types of posts on this website. When a self righteous and obviously self unaware poster scolds other posters for playing fast and loose with the facts and then plays fast and loose with the facts. Unintentional irony is always the funniest irony.
  2. I haven’t read the last few pages so maybe this has been addressed, but I agree with you and disagree with you on this point. I will agree that a very high percentage of“High aptitude“ kids are going to do well academically wherever they go to school. I also think that someone can make a good argument that the sociological aspect of most public schools (usually a much more diverse group of students from a racial, economic and customs perspective) can be a benefit to kids. but there are also very legitimate reasons to send kids to private schools. as mentioned above, it really depends on the particular school. Of course you are going to have wealthy parents whose kids are dumb and entitled go to private schools. That’s just reality. but private schools alsoOffer a host of positive benefits including: 1) Religion- whether you happen to be religious or not, there are many, many people that are and do enjoy the fact that many religious-based schools teach religion and their sense of morality. You may think the reviews are ridiculous but those are their views and that is a big factor when they decide on schools. 2) Extracurricular activities- This is actually a huge one for many parents. If you live in an area with a large public school then your options to play football, basketball, drama, debate or just about any extracurricular programs are severely limited. You are now competing against a huge number of people for a relative few open spots. 3) Expectations- I agree with everyone that parental involvement is a huge factor. But, the expectations of the institutions also play a huge role. The Baltimore school clearly did not have any expectations that even a large percentage of their students would graduate and go to college. as always, human nature is always going to be what it is and kids will be kids. I don’t think it is arguable that a kid is more likely to fall between the cracks in a large public school versus a small private school.
  3. Have to disagree with this specific point. I agree the Catholic Church has made gross errors over the years. I understand why they handled the sexual abuse scandal the way that they did but it still did not make it right. They should have been completely transparent in their investigations and should have admitted the issues publicly and routed out the bad offenders. but, what you are asserting is that learned, intelligent individuals like the pope shouldn’t be able to dictate church positions on sexual issues because they take vows of celibacy. I completely disagree. There are literally thousands of scientific sociological studies that address virtually every issue that the church deals with in these matters. In addition, they have an almost unlimited supply of anecdotal evidence to pull from in their literally millions of conversations with men and women and married couples and members of LGBT community. I used to actually have pretty much the same opinion that you have. Especially when it comes to marriage. How would a priest know what it takes for a successful, happy marriage when they’ve never experienced it. But the reality is, that they are actually more qualified than almost any other subset of people. The reason is that over thousands of years they have discussed marriage and marriage issues with literally millions of married couples. Certainly there are many common traits that are necessary for a successful marriage and Priess have heard all of the good and all of the bad. Mike Leach never played football and yet is considered one of the best offensive minds in football maybe ever.
  4. The irony of this post is off the charts. DD's claims: 1) It is an absolute fact that the song has racist origins 2) It doesn't matter if the song is actually racist or not if our black athletes think it is then we should respect their feelings and no one should get to tell them what they should be offended about "If you say so, but it's clear that the EOT is no longer a unifying tradition at the University of Texas." So after 100s of pages of telling people that the song is racist, that even if it is not racist it doesn't matter if it is or not if black people, especially black athletes, think that it is racist then we should do away with it. You fully admit to having always sung the song after games and will continue to do so. So you admit that continued to sing a song that you admit was considered offensive and racist by the players. You continued to sing a song and will continue to sing it even though you claim it is "no longer a unifying tradition at the University of Texas." Who is the fucking racist here. As usual, you and your ilk have zero true principles and zero character.
  5. Just one quick comment on minstrel shows. People have to understand that there is no common type of "minstrel" show. The ones in Texas at the time were much more akin to variety shows than anything related to racism. Most had no performers in black face at all. Per the info found when this shit came up previously, the author of the song wanted to make a school song and poke fun at the current UT Pres. The song was NOT created to be performed at a minstrel show. It was not created by people associated with putting on the minstrel show. It had exactly nothing to do with the show. The truth is that in those times there was literally almost no way for the song creators to perform it for an audience that included the school president except at the minstrel shows. The only reason it was performed there was because the creators knew that the school president would be in attendance. Thats it. The Lee association stuff is stupidly ignorant. The minstrel show connection has been taken wildly out of context. There just isnt anything there. The reality is that a professor stirred up racial animosity during an emotional time on campus and convinced some 18-22 year olds that something was racist and none of the 18-22 year olds spent any time researching the facts for themselves. I dont blame the 18-22 year olds. And I dont blame the professor. Just pointing out what happened. My guess is that all of this will be pointed out in the report. I completely disagree with those that are saying that because something offends a particular group that other people have no right to question them. Of course they have the right to do that and they should do that. I am not talking about criticising them or belittling them or anything similar. I am saying that the offended group needs to have all of the relevant facts before making snap judgments. Allowing traditions and other things to be cancelled based on extremely weak or made up or taken out of context information, is always bad. I especially think those that maintain that they personally do not think the song is racist but think it needs to go because some of the players think it is are lacking in character. If you believe in something and you have researched all of the relevant facts about it and still feel that way then you should never back down. Because you may not care about the song or other types of traditions but one day this same thing will happen to something that you do care about.
  6. CSB time that shows how things can change pretty quickly. I was able to be in the living room when Mack was recruiting a highly rated black athlete in 2004 (single mother with no father present). At one point during the pitch Mack asked the player/mother if they knew anything about the "Eyes of Texas Tradition". They didn't say much. Mack spent the next 15 minutes talking about the song and its meaning within the Texas community. Really hyped up the family atmosphere of not just the team but the whole Texas experience. He then turned directly to the mother and said essentially "and we sing that song and raise our hands whether we win or lose. We are not going to win every game and is important to have character and part of character is doing things even when you dont feel like. But we build men with character at Texas". The mom was sold and the player eventually signed with Texas. Just amazing to me that something that now is being used as a negative to UT and a perceived slight to Black players was used as a closing recruiting tool to Black players just a few years ago.
  7. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    Man you are strange. I’m not claiming any defense. The FBI and the associated Mueller investigation tried to use FARA as leverage against Flynn. All Powell pointed out is that Flynn complied with the law as written by registering with Congress via the LDA. Powell, rightfully, pointed out that if Flynn violated FARA then every single entity that registered with Congress via the LDA also violated FARA. It was a bullshit claim by the FBI. The point that continually sails above your head is that you and others keep trying to imply that Flynn got caught somehow or that he was trying to hide his activities somehow. It is absurd to suggest that he was trying to hide his activities when he specifically reported those activities to Congress. Under the LDA, Congress can, at any time, refer any particular foreign activity of a registrant to the DOJ for further scrutiny. Flynn followed the law as written. Now you may not like that law and I may not like that law but that doesn’t change the fact that it was the law. FARA was written back in the 1930s and the LDA basically modernized the law. as mentioned earlier, Biden’s current pics for secretary of state, secretary of defense and Director of national intelligence formed a lobbying/consulting company that cater to foreign businesses and foreign governments. They registered the entity with Congress via the LDA. Their firm is doing the exact same thing that Flynns firm was doing which is using their government contacts as leverage to atttact business. it will be quite telling if/when those individuals are forced to retroactively register as foreign agents if you will have the same opinion of them as you have of Flynn.
  8. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    It is not bullshit trolling and you are misrepresenting my stance and taking the argument out of context. As I have said multiple times now, I have absolutely no problem with Biden talking with the president of Mexico about whatever he wants to talk about. The issue is with other people that claimed that anyone speaking to a foreign government before they were sworn in was undermining US policy. You keep saying things like butterflies and rainbows as if the conversation was completely generic and devoid of policy implications. That is just false. JuSt as one example, there is the issue of the current treatment of asylum seekers. The current administration, rightly or wrongly, has made a stipulation that those waiting for asylum must do it in Mexico. That is the official position Of the current US government. Biden flat out told the president of Mexico that he was going to change that policy. You obviously do not seem to think that that is a big deal. I also do not happen to think it is that big of a deal. But it is, in fact, discussing changing current US policy with a foreign government. Using your own words, that is beyond well wishing and hypotheticals. That is straight up telling another country’s leader that you are going to change the current US policy towards that nation to a position that is more favorable to that country’s president. And again, I see absolutely nothing wrong with Biden doing that. Flynn did not tell the Russians that the Trump administration was going to change anything. He asked them to temper their response to the Obama administration‘s latest round of sanctions and embassy personnel closings. Unlike the above I do not see any issue with Flynn or anyone asking a foreign government to temper their retaliation against the United States. You seem to think that Flynn asking them to temper their retaliation was somehow nefarious.
  9. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    Sigh. Flynn’s lawyers asked the govt where Flynn should register for his consulting work. The govt told them Flynn should register with Congress under the Lobbying Disclosure Act and not under FARA. So that is where they initially filed. Later, the govt said he should file under FARA. So he did. He never failed to file his activities with the government. This wouldn’t be the cloakroom if people didn’t accuse me of lying by lying themselves.
  10. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    1) no idea but I doubt it 2) I don’t think so 3) I don’t think so Now answer mine. 1) What relevance or difference does it make that Flynn was a registered foreign agent, just like Biden’s incoming national security advisor is, when he was talking with Kisylak. This “foreign agent” stuff is hilarious. Biden has at least 2 members of his team that are registered foreign agents. His national security advisor and his senior advisor ( hired to run the campaign for a Ukrainian prime minister). Bidens freaking picks for sec of state, sec of defense and director of national intelligence all formed a consulting group in 2017 to leverage their government contacts with foreign governments and businesses on how to gain US government contracts. And I have absolutely no problem with that. But they did the exact same thing that Flynn did and yet somehow you mopes don’t care about that anymore. 2) Does the law that the idiots above were referencing that said that Flynn should be put in jail only apply to certain foreign governments or all of them?
  11. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    I feel like I have stated imy position pretty clearly a few times now. I am laughing at the people that said Flynn should be criminally charged for talking to foreign governments about new policy directions before his administration was sworn in and Biden doing the same thing. I think that Biden has every right to talk to foreign leaders and I believe that he has every right to even talk about new policy stances that his incoming administration will have. I think every administration has done this and they should. I am laughing that when trumps national security advisor did the same thing it was suddenly a criminal act. I am laughing at the inconsistent mental twisting. I am laughing at the total and complete moronic behavior described above. These are great examples: jimmyjazz - He (Flynn) was acting against US foreign policy. He should be in prison. That's the end of the story. I fucking dare you to put up a cogent argument to the contrary. CaptainAnt- His (Flynn’s) goal was subversion of US policy of a sitting US president, literally acting against the national interest abroad. Read those quotes. Not anything about Flynn being a foreign agent or negotiating or anything else. Those two idiotsthought Flynn should be put in jail for doing his actual job. As I said, their stances were retarded then and they are retarded now. The only difference is that now that the shoe is on the other foot they can’t seem to remember their piousness
  12. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    Fair points. A bit hyperbolic but fair. I suppose one could argue that anyone who lobbies on behalf of foreign dictators or cigarette companies or China or any number of bad actors are slimy. It would be a really big net of prominent people but I agree that Flynn was chasing the cash more than worrying about his conscious when they accepted the contract.
  13. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    You guys are just too stupid to even respond too sometimes. You don’t even know what you are talking about. First, to claim that the national security advisor to the POTUS is simply a “ Foreign agent dip shit “ is kind of telling. Flynn was trumps national security advisor. Before joining the admin he started a firm that had foreign business dealings and, as a result, he registered as a foreign agent. Jake Sullivan is going to be Biden‘s national security advisor. After leaving Hillary‘s campaign Sullivan joined a company called Macro Advisory Partners. The firm has many ex government people in it and has contracts with multiple foreign governments. As a result, Macro/Sullivan are registered foreign agents in the exact same filing that Flynn was. Literally identical. I’m guessing you and the usual suspects did not know that. Biden‘s incoming national security advisor is a registered foreign agent in the identical sense that Flynn was a registered foreign agent as trumps national security advisor. And go do a little search of the thread where all these lunatics up above made their quotes. All of them were saying that Flynn was actually talking to the Russian ambassador on behalf of Trump. That Trump, the freakingPresident elect of the United States as you referred to Biden,should really be the one who should be charged for interfering with the current administrations policies. The combination of your ignorance and hypocrisy is stunning.
  14. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    First of all, I do not care one bit if Biden changes our immigration policy. I thought trumps position on immigration was flawed and I think Biden‘s position on immigration is flawed. But both have the right to do what they think is best. To be clear, my original post (Confusing as it may be) was not, in anyway, meant to say anything about what Biden is doing or what Trump/Flynn did was either good or bad. I was just making fun of people for having stupid hypocritical positions. That being said, I would like to debate your response a bit. First, when Biden and his team admit that in the call they talked about redeploying border assets and changing current US asylum laws and so forth, I do not see how you would say that is not negotiating foreign policy. It clearly is. Biden is openly telling a foreign country that the current approach with them under the current administration regarding immigration is going to change. again, I have no problem with that. It is how it should be. The new administration gets to call the new shots. It is actually much more of a negotiation and an undermining of the current policy though then what Flynn did. Flynn did not say that any current policy between Russia and United States was going to change. I read your posted transcript 3 times and it is just not in there. Flynn is asking that Russia refrain from a knee jerk reaction to the existing administration that would put the incoming admin in a tough spot. I fail to see how that is even controversial. Certainly not shady. And Kisylak initiated the call, not Flynn. For you, or anyone, to insinuate that what Flynn was doing was undermining US policy, then you would have to say that the US policy at the time was a hope that Russia would retaliate strongly against the United States. That is too stupid to even consider. I have no issue with you or even the new Biden administration. We will see what they do. But, you have to admit, that a few of the lunatics above like Denison and Jimmy Jazz, openly stated that Flynn should be charged with a crime for solely having a conversation with a foreign leader before the new administration was sworn in. And, based on that, they are being absolutely hypocritical when Biden is doing the exact same thing now. What they were saying was retarded then and is still retarded now.
  15. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    I know reading is hard but I think you can probably get there. I am not at all talking about the character of the Biden administration. I am talking about the character of the idiots above who openly argued a position that they now say is just fine.
  16. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    Sure it is. Explain to me how it is different? The idiots above said Flynn was a criminal because he was negotiating US foreign policy before the new administration was sworn in. That he was openly undermining the Obama administration. Now, Biden is negotiating US foreign policy before he has been sworn in. Buy that exact same definition, how is Biden not undermining the Trump administration‘s foreign policy? Do you not see the naked hypocrisy of the idiots above? as I said, I had no problem with what Flynn did in his conversation with the Russian ambassador and I have absolutely no problem with what Biden is doing with his conversations with the Mexican president. I am merely laughing at the stupidity of the posters that I quoted above.
  17. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    I don’t think that means what you think it does.
  18. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    No shit. And Flynn was the incoming National Security Advisor. The idiots above are the ones who referred to Flynn as a private citizen because Trump wasn’t inaugurated yet. That’s the point. By their own idiotic words Biden is just a private citizen at this point who is undermining current IS policy.
  19. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    Lmao. Maybe you guys should read the post again. Countless idiots on this board said Flynn was a criminal for interfering with US policy before Trump was inaugurated by having a phone call with the Russian ambassador and “discussing” US policy. One of the biggest idiots was even presented a hypothetical where the incoming administration would do the same thing and if he would still feel the same way and he indignantly said that he would. i guess you either have principles and character or not. it was no big deal when Flynn talked to the ambassador and it is no big deal that Biden is doing it. The naked hypocrisy is amusing to me
  20. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    Just curious why you think his work with Turkey was "reprehensible"?
  21. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    I forgot where I was. President elect Joe Biden has openly admitted to talking with foreign leaders about changing US foreign policy while still a private citizen. A few years ago, there were a lot of people that thought such an act was worthy of jail time. Also, I have not yet started drinking which is a flaw on my part.
  22. sheeeit

    Biden/Flynn

    https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2020-12-19/mexicos-president-says-spoke-by-phone-with-us-president-elect-biden For no other reason than I found it funny. I am sure the usual suspects will be posting how Biden should go to jail and is a miserable traitor for discussing policy before inaugurated. A few of my favorites: jimmyjazz- He was acting against US foreign policy. He should be in prison. That's the end of the story. I fucking dare you to put up a cogent argument to the contrary. Hugo- Flynn is a fucking traitor. That is all. dennison-Why was MikeFlynn talking to the Russians?" Hayduke- Flynn interfered with Obama’s foreign policy by negotiating with Russia and lied to Pence and the FBI about it. That was not legal. Lagunamadre- That would be a good defense. Guessing the prosecutors would probably point out that Flynn was a private citizen (not an "intelligence official") on December 29, 2016 when he spoke to the Russian ambassadors about sanctions. What would be your next defense after the courtroom got finished laughing at your first one? CaptainAnt- His goal was subversion of US policy of a sitting US president, literally acting against the national interest abroad. CaptainAnt- Suck my hairy ass and read and respond to the rest of my post while you celebrate the clearing of a person who actively conspired to subvert US foreign policy jimmyjazz- Flynn was working against US foreign policy. It doesn't surprise me a bit that Anastasis and others don't seem to see the problem with this. To me, it's dangerously close to treason, but hey, that's just me. Dennison- The FBI was well within its authority to want to look into what he and the Russians were talking about. Private citizens are prohibited from negotiating with foreign governments in disputes involving the United States. jimmyjazz- He was working against US foreign policy. Only in your retarded "I'm not a freak Libertarian" Libertarian pro-Trump world could you make the argument you just made and then also make any similar case had it been the inverse in terms of parties. Dude, own your fucking Trumpiness. jimmyjazz- No, it's because taking actions to contradict existing foreign policy with an enemy is in my view "treasonous". Are you really struggling with this? TRUMP HAD NOT BEEN INAUGURATED. jimmyjazz- The President correct? What if there’s an election at the end of his term and his successor ran explicitly on overturning many of his policy achievements and defeated someone that basically ran on maintaining the status quo? What if one of the most noteworthy policy differences he was proposing was a change in the tone and direction of the foreign policy? Are you fucking serious? Of course I would have been "OK" with it, disregarding political differences. Nobody gets a fucking head start you idiot. jimmyjazz- Let's try this again: do you think it's cool for a private citizen to contradict foreign policy? dennison- Well, it's against the law. hayduke- It’s ok to not follow the law when it’s my team!!!! Trumpkin cant help but trumpkin!
  23. I think it is a solid hire. Cracks me up how miserably wrong all of the supposed insiders were. Of course it won’t but a LOT of people should clue in that what is reported by websites is just speculative bullshit. This is very true at Texas as well.
  24. I’d say Auburn is a top 20 job. Maybe around 15 but obviously subjective. I did a little checking and during GMs tenure the ranking of Alabama at the time of the game was 1,2,2,1,1,1,5,1. He did manage to win 3 times. My guess is Sark, Fickle or Napier.
  25. Rare night alone in 2020. Weed then beer then prep then beer then start cooking then weed then finish cooking then weed then red wine. love the cooking techniques from here. I went basic, oven for 20, seer on grill 3 a side. Spectacular. The salt for 30 pre cooking is genius and vastly underrated. Filet plus old school mac and cheese because I’m old and the combo is glorious. I am a young firm Asian masseuse away from my greatest night of 2020.
×
×
  • Create New...