Jump to content

ndawg

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    849
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ndawg

  1. Just now, EMAWesome said:

    Clinton's lawyers would have gone through every closet of every member of Starr's staff looking for skeletons and they would have paraded this one out for the media the second they got a hold of it if there was anything to this. 

    This is really not solid reasoning. It's horseshit conjecture that fits your biases.

  2. 1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

     

     

    People seem to forget Trump absolutely loved Comey until he started doing his job. 

    I couldn't remember if Trump outwardly expressed any support for Comey then, but, yeah, that's why the quote stuck out to me.

  3. Wow:

    Quote

    “If I did one mistake with Comey, I should have fired him before I got here. I should have fired him the day I won the primaries,” Trump said. “I should have fired him right after the convention, say I don’t want that guy. Or at least fired him the first day on the job. ... I would have been better off firing him or putting out a statement that I don’t want him there when I get there.”

     

  4. Wow:

    Quote

    “If it wasn’t so dangerous to Texas and to our republic, I could let it go,” she wrote. “But it IS that dangerous and I can’t just sit by and watch it happen. I have to speak out regardless of threats of lawsuits to silence me or threats that I’ll be personally responsible for turning Tarrant County blue, or attempts at public disdain to shame me into shutting up.”

     

  5. 10 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

    That's really weird that federal withholding comes out of their paychecks then.  Does their refund exactly equal the total amount that was taken out of their checks?

     

     

    Narrator: it doesn't.

    Also, so many people don't know the difference between payroll taxes (medicare/ss) and income tax. People who pay zero in income tax still give up ~7.65% of their income in payroll taxes.

  6. 6 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    And solar panels are the only way to be carbon neutral? I’m a farmer and have a wind turbine providing my needs. This is not a fucking building code for safety. It’s a fucking mandate. The state knows better than you.

    I'm not arguing that a solar panel mandate is the best possible means of accomplishing the goal of carbon neutrality, just that your civil liberties aren't being encroached by it. There is absolutely nothing about this mandate that suggests the government believes it knows any more than anybody else about the best way to power their home. The goal is to wean the power grid off of fossil fuels. If you've got wind turbines, adding solar panels will increase what you can contribute to the grid.

    6 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    What about my example about the woman wanting an abortion and have to put up with bullshit I cited. If you can’t see the same oppressive line of thinking then I don’t know what to say

    The aim of the legislation in question is to obstruct abortions, which constitutes the infringing of women's personal liberties. As such, it is completely wrong and should be stopped. You are able to compare the two, and while there are some similarities, you also seem unable (or unwilling) to also contrast the two. Building codes are not the same thing as reproductive rights, they're entirely different contexts. Building a house requires not only extracting a ton of limited planetary resources, but it also ties up land usage indefinitely in a way that has a tangible ongoing environmental impact. I don't know what to tell you if you can't see the differences as well as the similarities... those differences are why pie-in-the-sky fantasies like libertarianism don't actually work. There's always a tension between personal liberty and public good. Each issue, whether it's abortions or building codes, demands a far richer perspective than you're applying here. There isn't some grand unified theory that we can categorically apply to every issue and come out with the most sensible policy. Governing is hard.

    • Like 1
  7. 11 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    So you have no issue with the state of California mandating solar panel on the roofs of new homes to be built. Maybe I don’t want that shit on the roof of MY OWN HOME for aesthetic reasons. Is that freedom in your opinion?

    Building codes are ancient, and are well within the established authority of the government. If California elected a government that aims to be carbon neutral, a solar panel mandate is a completely legitimate usage of that authority.

    How you feel about the aesthetics of your house doesn't mean anything to me, but your house's impact on our planet does.

  8. 16 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

    You want more hypocrisy.  On one hand Democrats will claim that it is improper to condemn all illegal aliens for the violent crimes committed by a select few and then turn around and claim that every member of the NRA is responsible for the actions of one lone gunman.  I could go through an entire computer keyboard typing in examples of hypocrisy in the Democratic Party. 

    I believe you could provide many examples of what you would call hypocrisy, but that's not the same thing as examples of actual hypocrisy. All you've done with the NRA example is lift two different lines of reasoning out of their context and compared them in a vacuum.

  9. 57 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    That's about right to me.  GOLL and I have been repeating our Marko Ramius quote: "Personally, I'd give us...one chance in three."

    1 in 3 is a better chance than any Dem has had in a generation, and that's worth playing out the string, for sure.

    He's got better odds of winning than Trump had.

  10. Saban is an asshole the way that folks with obsessive compulsive personalities are assholes. He's hard on people, difficult to please, and rages at imperfections. But he's also self critical -- he's probably harder on himself than he is on his staff and players. Think about it, as much as he's actually won, he's still displeased.

    Herman is an asshole the way that narcissists are assholes. He builds a cult of personality around himself (i.e. "mensa"), and attacks anyone who threatens that image. When he's cornered, he'll reach deep in his back of narcissist tricks, like demeaning people.

    They couldn't be more different, IMO.

    • Like 2
  11. 57 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

    The Problem: Texas hasn't been relevant in football for the bulk of these players' childhoods. Can't sell the recruits on success, so we sell them on the campus, facilities, and Austin, TX. In return, we get players who come here to be on vacation in exchange for bare minimum participation in football.

    The Solution: Find a coach who knows how to motivate players that already have everything they want. Need to start looking at the NFL level so we can bring in a guy who can legitimately come in and tell these guys that they aren't that great, yet, and that this life that they're living is just a small preview of what the league will give them if they would actually show up and put in the work.

    I don't know that I can agree with that solution. Get better at the game, and it's impossible not to be motivated to play. Conversely, continue to suck, and you'd have to be delusional to get motivated.

    My solution: get a coaching staff that can, over the course of a fall camp, produce a team that can execute at a D1 level.

  12. No idea what the offensive staff was doing during the fall camp, but it seems like every other division 1 offensive staff spent that time actually installing some concepts that their players could execute.

    I'll be the first to admit I'm not a football expert, but our offense seems to lack any sort of timing. On running and especially screen plays, even when the blocking seems like it's there it still arrives way before the play. Sam's screen passes take forever, and he seldom throws to receivers that aren't wide open. While there were a few times where it seemed clear that we called the wrong play or protection (e.g. extra blitzers have a free run to the QB), most of the time our offense just looked like it was just plain bad at execution. I don't know what we're good at, other than Sam occasionally leaving the pocket finding someone downfield, or one of the playmakers making someone miss.

    We suck at the same things we've sucked at for years. Herman's not the guy. We need a coach that can mask our deficiencies and accentuate our strengths. Seems like Herman is masking our strengths and accentuating our deficiencies. I can't help but to get the sense that we're about to plunge into a free fall.

  13. 3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    He does tremendously.  He talked about her in relation to the 25 amendment recently.  And acknowledging they knew inside the campaign she was unfit for office and probably wouldn’t have served as VP in the unlikely event McCain had won.

    Interesting. Can you point me to where I can find the interview?

×
×
  • Create New...