Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Surly Horns

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

sheeeit

Legacy Members
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sheeeit

  1. I predict that a large percentage of schools over the next 10 years will implement a 4 day school week.  Certainly the smaller school districts.  

    Like any change or program, the implementation is critical and you have to have a Super that is all in, but the results can be pretty good.  There is a Super in Wagoner, OK that is sort of creating the mold for the program.  Wagoner is a fairly small town with enrollment of around 120 per grade.  They are about 60% white and 40% black and hispanic.  Some highlights:

    1) They have chosen to take Mondays off.  Partially because a number of doctors offices and other businesses have limited hours on Fridays.  Also, sports, especially football, are still a big thing in small towns in Oklahoma and they wanted the school spirit/pep rallys, homecoming events etc that are usually on Fridays. 

    2) They added 10 or so minutes per required class and go from 7:45 to 4:00, Tuesday through Friday.  Same pay.

    What they claim is that test scores have gone up across the board, behavior issues have dropped dramatically, truancy has dropped dramatically, teacher retention is greatly improved (they had a teacher leave and without advertising they had more applications than they could get through).  They just had their first class graduate that had been in the 4 day program for the entirety of middle school and high school (7 years) and their scholarship pool was around $5M for the seniors versus $750K 7 years ago.

    They have been very creative on working parents.  They had a local non profit offer free babysitting and CPR/safety certification to any students that wanted it and then offered the school as essentially a day care facility manned by students that wanted a little extra money.  So parents had the option of sending kids to the school for the day or part of the day for a very nominal fee.  When they first decided to go to 4 days many parents were upset but after a few months they only had 5 or 6 kids that showed up on Mondays.

    The real proof is that they did polling last year and over 85% of students, parents and staff like the 4 day schedule over the 5 day.

    As for cost savings, it wasn't much.  The Super estimated they could retain 2 extra teachers with the savings.  They really did t for the benefits mentioned above.  

  2. On 2/4/2025 at 8:24 AM, Dennis Taylor said:

    Hilarious story Damon tells about the genius that is Jack

     

     

    I remember seeing that and it was really cool.  Thanks for posting.

    As for the Departed, I have watched it a few times and I would give it a 7.5-8.  Its really good but not great.  The last 30 minutes are really jumbled.  On the acting:

    DiCaprio- A

    Damon- A

    Farmiga- A

    Baldwin- A-

    Nicholson- B. t just seemed like he was playing Jack Nicholson and not the character and his lines were just a series of one liners where some worked and some didn't.

    Wahlberg- D. I have to actually fast forward through his scenes.  He literally can not act when he has to be serious and deliver tight dialogue.

    Also, while not top 5, the Guy Ritchie movies that had gangster ties (Snatch, RocknRolla, etc) are really fun movies.

  3. 8 hours ago, C-Man said:

    Learned this AM that my in-laws' illegally-here-for-25+-years maid suffered a stroke last night and is at Presbyterian Hospital. Wondering how that will ultimately shake out.

    When they asked my wife and I, "Did you hear what happened to Myrna last night?" we both expected the next words to be, "She was picked up and is being deported." 

     

    "Investigating"? He'll be back on the job by next week. That dog will hunt in Tarrant County.

    You do NOT pass the stoned test.  

  4. High

    Not sure where to put this but this is the safest spot.   The male A&M cheerleaders are shockingly gay.  They have to know.   It’s almost a bit.   

  5. I did some more digging, maybe this has already been hashed out on here and I missed it.  If so, it would be pretty easy to direct me to that info.

    I found TwiceHorn's post interesting.  Here is what he said:

    "Curious that Zuck didn't give that same testimony, in detail, under oath when subpoenaed in that case.  See, in particular, Slip. Op. pp. 16-21. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-411new_197d.pdf"  

    I read the case he posted and it made zero mention of Zuck at all.  So I researched it a bit but could not find anything, at all, related to Zuck testifying or being subpoenaed in that case.  Twice is a lawyer so maybe he has access to sites I am unaware of that detail this kind of stuff, which is why I asked him to respond.  

    I did find the stuff where Jim Jordan subpoenaed Meta (and all the big social media companies) for information and where Jordan threatened to hold Zuck in contempt for Meta not providing the requested info in a timely fashion.  It appears Jordan was ultimately satisfied with the info Meta provided.

    I found no instance where Zuck either did testify under oath or refused to testify under oath regarding any of the censorship claims.  That is why I asked Twice to elaborate as he is generally truthful in the stuff he posts.  

    I am certain Zuck was cagey about the issue.  Twice called him a slimy little fuck, and he very well may be.  I would certainly agree that he was a slimy little fuck if he did, in fact, testify under oath, or refuse to testify under oath,  in a different manner than he showed on Rogan.  I wanted to see what he said under oath which is what Twice implied.

     

  6. 3 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

    that's the whole point, he refused to testify. you're not going to find what you are looking for because it doesn't exist. the man is a coward

    TwiceHorn can speak for himself, but did Zuck plead the fifth?  How does one "refuse to testify" if they are subpoenaed in a federal case?  

  7. On 12/6/2024 at 4:19 AM, TwiceHorn said:

    Curious that Zuck didn't give that same testimony, in detail, under oath when subpoenaed in that case.  See, in particular, Slip. Op. pp. 16-21. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-411new_197d.pdf

    Could he be playing both ends against the middle?  

    Unpossible.  Zuck has never been accused of being a slimy little fuck.

    I find this whole thing kind of fascinating.  Virtually impossible to get all of the relevent information to make an informed decision.  You stated:

    "Curious that Zuck didn't give that same testimony, in detail, under oath when subpoenaed in that case."  I have searched as much as I can and can not find anywhere where Zuck gave testimony under oath in that case.  Can you show that?  It would be extremely damaging to Zuck's credibility if he did actually testify differently under oath than he is stating now on shows like Rogans.  

  8. 3 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

    For most of my life, I believed most everything I became aware of was included in my dome. The vassitudes of aging have belied that belief. I acknowledge you are known to me, much like the mesquite thorn that overmatched my footwear. Make the most of it among the company of mesquite thorns.

    The reason you are the mesquite thorn that has made itself known isn’t due to insecurity. Just the opposite. It is certainty. You are a threat to members of my family. US institutions and medical experts have gone rogue? Fuck you. 

    Further, fuck your lily-livered posts on the subject of the alt right and the scourge of turnip as well. You are far more enabler than critic.

    That is outstanding.  

  9. 34 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

    As @wildcat09 mentioned, if Hostomel falls, Kyiv likely falls within 72 hours.  In other words, if the Russians had more competence and luck on their side, things unravel fast.

    You can visit us in the DT thread and I can dig up the videos discussing how dicey things got with the attack on the Hostomel airfield.  A lot point to the convoy stalling just north of Kyiv, but Hostomel was more important.

    We will just have to disagree.  You act as if luck and competence have never been considered before when making predictions for military battles.  He didn't say it's 60/40 or even 80/20.  He said 3 days.  That means no amount of luck and/or incompetence can stall this.  It would probably take the tanks a few days just to get there unopposed.   I readily admit that luck played a big part.  It always does.  I think only an idiot would stick his neck out there and make a prediction like that to Congress and POTUS.  His judgement was terrible.  Couple that with his assessment of Afghanistan and he was not competent for his position.

    Plus, these are not under the radar events where somehow the top people got fooled by their underlings.  The Russia invasion was the greatest geopolitical event in years.  The US, as well as every other first world country in the world, have been assessing Russia and their competencies for years.  I believe, just my opinion, that there were almost certainly  factions within the intelligence and military communities that had very different opinions on both Russia and Afghanistan.  Milley's job was to sort it out and find the reality.  He was comically wrong on both events.  

    This is not political.  Some poster said Milley fucks.  I merely pointed out that for the 2 most significant events that happened under his watch, he failed miserably in his assessment.  

  10. 13 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

    Nobody thought the Russians would be as incompetent as they were or that they had lost so much institutional knowledge over the past decade or two..

    there were many who failed to predict even the invasion

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0T2MYXljL5o

     

    The point is that Milley had access to every bit of military intelligence, cia intelligence, international intelligence etc.  I mean one of the main tenets of his job is to know this stuff.  There are likely hundreds of military people at the Pentagon and across the globe whose  job was to know what the state of the Russian military was as well as the Ukrainian military.  It is massive incompetence.  I get university officials making bad predictions or even politicians making bad predictions, but the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has to do better.  One mistake should have had him demoted but 2 spectacular failures is ridiculous.

  11. 19 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

    If I'm not mistaken, that was his prediction if Ukraine was left to fend for itself with zero foreign aid. Which was a lot of smart people's conclusions. I think most everyone (thankfully) severely underestimate Ukraine's fighting spirit and ability to thwart what was viewed as a formidable invader.

    Well he made the prediction to congress on February 5 and Russian invaded on February 24.  Obviously no material foreign aid was forthcoming in that 19 day window.  

    He is gone now so it doesn't really matter but no person in the world had access to as much intelligence regarding both situations as he did and he was just spectacularly wrong.  he should have been fired or, at a minimum, demoted to a lesser position.

  12. 1 hour ago, wood said:

    Man, is it wrong for me to publicly profess my love of Mark Milley? That dude fucks.

    Well he did say the Taliban was a "medium" threat in Afghanistan after we pulled out in 2021 and said it would take at least 2 years for them to take over.  It took 10 days.

    He said Kyiv would likely fall in 72 hours if Russia invaded.  Its been over 2.5 years.   

  13. Had a discussion about this years team versus original dream team.  Question was who would make the original dream team from this team and who would they replace.  The only ones I think make it from this years team are James, Durant and Curry.  I think they replace Magic, Bird and Stockton.  Possibly Edwards over Pippen but I don't think people realize how amazing at defense Pippen and Jordan were together.  

  14. Thoughts on Loper/Chevron.

    First, as far as I can tell, the following are the basic facts of the initial case:  The Magnuson-Stevens Act gave the NOAA the power to regulate the fishing industry and the herring fishing industry in particular in this instance.  For approximately the last 30 years, NOAA has required monitors on certain herring fishing vessels as they are authorized to do under the MSA.  The regulations specifically called for boats of a certain size to both have monitors on board and also pay for them.  In the Loper case, the size of the vessels was under the specific size regulation and, therefore, there was ambiguity on who would pay for the monitors.  In a somewhat agreed upon settlement, the smaller herring fishing vessels agreed to have monitors on board and NOAA agreed to pay for them.  This existed for many years.  Recently NOAA had severe funding issues and, as a result, chose to impose the cost of monitors on the Loper fishing vessels.   The lower courts looked at the case and applied the two part Chevron test which first determines if there is ambiguity in the language of the Act, and, if so, then they must decide if the actions imposed by the regulating agency (in this case NOAA) were "reasonable". 

    In the Loper case, it appears that the lower courts agreed the language regarding who must pay for the monitoring was ambiguous and then further found that the NOAA did have the authority to impose the costs on Loper based on Chevron.  What I think the issue is here is whether or not the lower courts actually considered whether the specific action by NOAA was "reasonable" or not but rather simply deferred that NOAA had the authority to do it based on Chevron.   What I think SCOTUS did was then tell the lower courts that based on the Administrative Procedure Act they had to make a specific ruling on the "reasonableness".

    Am I correct that as a result of Chevron, that the courts have pretty much always sided with the regulatory agencies post Chevron?  Are there any cases where a lower court actually ruled against a regulatory agency in a case of this type?  Has "reasonable" essentially been changed to "egregious" meaning the courts are almost always going to side with the regulatory agencies unless the regulations are so over the top that no one could reasonably agreee to them.

    At first glance, it does seem that Loper has a really good case.  Initially, both parties agreed that the cost of the monitors should not be borne by Loper as evidenced by the fact that NOAA did, in fact, pay for the monitors for many years.  Then when NOAA ran out of money they changed the rules in the middle of the game.  This is especially hard on the smaller vessels as the cost of a monitor has much more impact on their bottom line than it does on larger vessels that catch much more fish. 

    It is sort of on point in our current bizarro world that liberals are the ones decrying this decision as it certainly appears to be a case where the little guy is going to get squeezed out by the big guys with help from a government agency.  Historically the democrats have looked after the little guys and the republicans have favored the bigger guys.

    On a much broader level, I can certainly see why Chevron was reversed.  The issue I see is that, by nature, most of the regulatory agencies and  thus there regulations are impacted by the policy and political whims of whichever administration is currently in power.   And whichever regime is in power, whoever donates the most money to the party will likely get their way with regards to the regulations that affect them.   I think Chevron titled the fairness scales too far in the direction of the agencies and the direction of whichever party has current control.

     

  15. 43 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

    I understood what you meant. Your comparison was silly. Suggesting they are similar is silly. Hence my reply. 

    What is more likely? The shooter was trying to impress Jodie Foster, or an immature narcissist, or maybe, just maybe, the shooter actually believes Trump is a threat to Democracy?  My point is there are conspiracy theories about why Oswald shot Kennedy or Hinckey shot Reagan because there wasn’t an obvious reason. 

    Is anyone having trouble coming up with a motive of why someone would try to assassinate Trump? Everyone knows why 

    Holy shit.   Seek help.  Honestly.  

  16. I must’ve been under a rock, but I did not realize that the trial actually started. I spent a few minutes reading through some articles. I admit I never actually thought this would get to a trial. I actually think he will plea before there is a verdict.
     

     

  17. 2 hours ago, statsman said:

    He stayed on scholarship, ate with the team, practiced with the team, stood on the sidelines. He was even mentored by Borden, while Molitor had to flee campus. 

    It’s old news but Mixon was suspended for the season.  Did not practice, train, eat or attend any team activities.   

  18. High

    On 4/10/2024 at 8:26 PM, PRONG HORN said:


     

     

     

    IMG-2521.jpg

    I'm pretty high and do not want to bring anyone down but this seems like total BS.

Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.