-
Posts
51914 -
Joined
-
Days Won
302
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by Brisketexan
-
That is a shitty piece, because of verb tense. There's no "are learning." It's "have learned." The template is out there, it has been since early in his first term. He runs one basic play. And defensive coordinator worth a shit long ago figured out how to counter it. He runs it three times, the defense stands firm, h gets a half yard, declares that he scored a touchdown, and walks off the field raising his fist in triumph. Repeat ad infinitum.
-
I know this is funny, and ironic, and all that stuff....but it's also spot-on. Because in the end, that's all any laws, rules, etc. are. Because at their foundation, they rely on one thing: good-faith. The strength of the Rules of Professional Conduct is not really the enforcement mechanisms behind them. The strength of the Rules is 1) the expectation that most all lawyers will follow them, and 2) the good-faith belief in those rules and the effort attorneys make to actually follow them. As a result, 99% or some similar percentage of lawyers act within those rules. And we don't do so because we fear losing our license (I mean, we don't want to lose our license, for sure). We follow the Rules because they are good, and when we all follow them, they make our profession, the justice system, and our society better. Our laws are no different. I expect that most of y'all generally follow the law (let's leave out traffic laws and laws against smoking dope with your mistress and such). Is the reason that you don't murder or steal because you are afraid of the enforcement mechanism of prison, or is it because you have a moral compass of some sort? That is, you don't steal because you believe that stealing is wrong, or you at least believe that we have a better society when we all operate under a common code that stealing is wrong. That's good faith. That's a reflection of the fact that ALL rules are, at their foundation, simply a "gentlemen's agreement." Their strength is not in their enforcement mechanism (yes, having such a mechanism emphasizes that the rules are a real thing). Because once it gets to enforcement, the rule has failed. And importantly, if enough people (and the critical mass isn't a majority...it's much, much smaller....think 3%) decide that the rules aren't for them, and they are just going to disregard them, then the whole fucking system breaks down. A society can't have an enforcement mechanism sufficient to handle more than 1-2% of people opting out of the law or rules. This is back to what I've been warning about on this board, in my life, at Bar presentations, etc. for a decade now: the Rule of Law is just an agreement. And if enough people opt out of that agreement, then it is dissolved. Enforcement won't and can't fix it. The fix is....don't opt out of the Rule of Law. That goes for society. It goes for the legal profession. It goes for everyone and everything. So, Bozo can lament that lawyers don't do enough to enforce against bad lawyers. In doing so, he sounds like a good "tough on crime" Republican, saying that we just need more prisons. No. The only thing that will really have any effect is....we need fewer bad lawyers. We need fewer people who are good with committing crimes. Sure, enforcement is a thing, it should exist, it should be used, and it can surely be reformed, made more robust, etc. in any number of contexts. But the reason that we're seeing members of the legal profession behaving badly and against the Republic is because . . . a critical mass of society has chosen to do and support the same. We had a gentlemen's agreement to operate under objective rules. A particular segment of society, our political class, our legal profession, etc., have chosen to opt out of that agreement. They have simply decided that they are no longer going to follow it. Once that happens....it's over. No amount of rule-based enforcement will make a shit. Because opting out of the Rule of Law is necessarily opting into Rule of the Boot and Gun. Once that's done, then the only curative mechanism is opposing Boots and Guns. It's a stupid, self-destructive path to follow. But, it's the path that a critical mass has chosen, so that path is our destiny. You can try to pretend the old order still exists, matters, and can solve things. But you're just pretending.
-
Linda Cardellini…who is an all-timer. And Susan Sarandon…who is a hall-of-famer. Saw it last night, liked it. I love food and family stuff, though.
-
That’s fucking sick. They’re called “little people,” asshole.
-
^^^ This. And for those of us wondering how we could serve the needs of the constitution and republic (non lawyers), that might end up being the way, if it comes to that. Especially any of y’all with military experience and a willingness to use it. The executive can co-opt people to be its militia. The judiciary can do the same, and legally. And yes, it may involve an armed confrontation with rogue US govt officials. That’s absolutely on the table nowadays.
-
Top comment: Flint_Petal • 12h ago I bet she filmed this for her Only Pans
-
Because....and this is super, super important to understand in Texas, 2025....NONE of those things are the goal of state leadership. Killing all public education. That is the singular goal of our state leadership. A future generation of malleable drones and slaves is the dream, and they are very close to achieving it.
-
MIA, seen below, about to "fix the cable"....
-
Pete Rose: by all accounts, an epic asshole, treated other people like shit, broke one of the foundational rules of integrity of the game, almost certainly committed statutory rape.....shit, a list of accomplishments like that makes him a shoo-in for the MAGA Medal of Honor.
-
If you think that the MAGA GQP is the greatest threat the Republic has faced since the Civil War (and you'd be right about that), what is your most-likely-to-succeed path at derailing it? 1) Contribute your time and money to the Democratic party, counting on it to get its shit together and mount an effective opposition? 2) Join the Republican party, hoping and working to establish/build a counter-movement within the party to overtake the MAGA movement? At this point, I'm thinking the smart money is on option 2). I mean, neither will work, but 2) has a much higher chance (think 5% chance vs. 1% chance).
-
He is the poster child for "'good' is the sum of all the bad things that didn't happen." He creates a situation in which near-infinite bad things could happen. Then, he backs away from the situation that he created, points out that most (but not all) of the bad things that COULD have happened DIDN'T happen....and says "see, what a gripping victory I have delivered!"
-
Cons: will cost the state billions, cost each individual ratepayer hundreds, and increase the chance of outages. Pros: will make some campaign contributors, including a couple of very specific O&G types, lots of money. Yeah....everyone here knows that SAILS through, either this session or the next.
-
Brought to you by the folks who will soon turn all educational institutions into The Donald Trump Center for Kids Who Can't Read Good and Who Wanna Learn to Do Other Stuff Good Too.
-
And it's devastating that they are 100% right about how dumb their voters are.
-
Tracking Trump Administration and Cabinet picks
Brisketexan replied to PenelopeWitherspoon's topic in Cloak Room
NO DEI! MERIT-BASED HIRES ONLY!!!! Jesus. We live in the fucking upside-down. -
This. To defeat Nazis the first time, we sent fucking boatloads of weapons to this guy: I'm fine aligning with less-than-ideal-and-pure allies to defeat Nazis this second time.
-
America, 2025.... Not obscene, and must be permitted and protected at all costs: characterizing brown people as vermin, claiming they are "poisoning the blood of our country," saying they should be exterminated, etc. Arresting and imprisoning someone for writing an op-ed. Shit like that. Obscene, and must be banned: pictures of tits. Yeah....we're a shithole country.
-
America's Foreign Policy & Other Shit Going On Around the World thread
Brisketexan replied to bolverk's topic in Cloak Room
I mean....a full 1/3 of what the US imported from Syria was antiquities...likely looted. So, fuck it. -
America's Foreign Policy & Other Shit Going On Around the World thread
Brisketexan replied to bolverk's topic in Cloak Room
As a follow up....last year, the US did $12.7 million in trade with Syria. That is functionally.....zero. Any increase in trade with the US would help stabilize Syria. I mean, we won't DO that, because in idiot world, trade is only good if they are buying things from us, not vice-versa. -
"Tuesday." We call that "Tuesday."
-
America's Foreign Policy & Other Shit Going On Around the World thread
Brisketexan replied to bolverk's topic in Cloak Room
Actually.....broken clock can be right twice a day. There are some very good arguments for dropping sanctions against Syria once the Assad regime fell. If the world wants to give the new regime a chance to succeed, and to offer it a carrot and incentive to be a good actor, dropping sanctions is a good way to do it. In fact, keeping sanctions on Syria now that they've shaken off the shitty regime that was the reason Syria was sanctioned, would be unfair and arguably counter-productive. Now, did Trump reach that conclusion for that reason? Fucking OF COURSE NOT. But it's still what plenty of decent, objective international strategists would have advised and proposed. -
Only in the movie, though. However, I didn't know you dated her after your divorce....you both seemed to have moved on, though, which is good.
-
Have you contracted Covid-19?
Brisketexan replied to DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt's topic in Daily Texan
-
Counterpoint: She afrikaan do whatever she wants, man.
-
Unquestionably. We can't design ANY element of ANY system that won't have outsized advantages/disadvantages for some subsets. The virtue of agrarian society sucked for the disabled. The virtues of our new information economy suck for those with a below-median IQ. I'm really smart, and process information well and quickly....and also have lousy vision, and was never, ever going to be the most athletic/strongest man around. In early agrarian societies, I would have been far from a "top performer." Today, that same mix of attributes puts me in the top performer category. A society that prized warriors and strong laborers would not be a great society for Brisket, or anyone physically disabled. A society that prizes intellectual skills is much better for us....and is worse for Steve Strongman. And my bigger point is that we shouldn't make broad value judgments, like "strong manual laborers are better" or "high-IQ people are better," or "fully abled [or disabled] people are better." A high-functioning society has a place and mechanism for ALL of those people to live a relatively secure, dignified life.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... COOKIE MONSTER!