Jump to content

pyrohornIII

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    3,950
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by pyrohornIII

  1. I don't mind Sark doing the narrating here.  I want him to become the voice of UT when it comes to excellence and football.  Might as well start now, since it's his voice the recruits are going to be hearing more than the MoC.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  2. Trump boasts so much about his brand.  It seems like it would be taking a pretty good beating about now.  How does that affect his overall financial picture?   Will a reduction in the valuation of his brand be reflected in the value of his assets which then makes whatever he still holds worldwide seem to be a riskier investment for those who leant him money for things like the golf course in scotland, etc?  Can those lenders now revisit those loans and renegotiate due to the fallout here?

     

  3. I searched but couldn't find a specific thread on this group.  They fly pretty much under the radar.   That's why I was glad to hear this group was forming and think their messaging might hit a note with some of you.  

    Home - Find Out Pac

    Their video won't imbed here, but the link is pretty reliable.  

    Here's a Progress Texas podcast interview that gets into the history, motivation and plans for this group.  https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/happy-hour-124-find-out-pac-targets-texas-supreme-courts/id1552998795?i=1000645075600

     

  4. 2 hours ago, closetohumping said:

    I think eh did have a youngish Vince backing up Vick?

    You are right.  VY actually started the first 3 games of the 2011 season for Philly.   It was not a great team, and in 2012 Reid would be gone.  So not sure how much was on VY's shoulders for the season, or the team overall.  I'd forgotten about that.  

  5. On 2/12/2024 at 7:38 AM, Pam Cummings said:

    Exactly. Anyone think Brady is winning any super bowls if he gets drafted by the Jets?

    This made me wonder how things might have gone if Reid would have drafted VY.  About that time is when McNabb was starting to lose a step.  Could those two have won some superbowls together?

  6. On 1/30/2024 at 7:37 AM, BurntEyes said:

    I'll never understand why any female would date an abuser like Tyreek. She's clearly self confident, driven, and stupidly attractive. :::Sigh:::

    That's a discussion for another thread and your question on Kevin has been answered.

    Just like there are a certain number of assholes, there are a certain number of women who think they can tame those assholes.  It's a competition of sorts between women, I am convinced.

  7. 56 minutes ago, Cairn Horn88 said:

    image.thumb.png.b7eb39aa4a6082969fc33ad397dd120a.png

    I am anticipating that our rate goes up as more Sark years replace the Herman years.  Lots of attrition in that transition.

    11 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

    wtf is that?

    I would bet it's more Austin boat Parade than a Trump flotilla.

  8. The best thing that could happen locally would be to make all races county level non partisan.  School districts and municipalities, service districts already are like that.  Go with non partisan and ranked choice.   The 134 PAC which is a Dem PAC west of 35 is pushing for ranked choice, but the parties won't support it.   

    And your point about the ease of voting in the urban area holds water until you get into the historically blue sections of town.  The recent election law changes have increased the hours and locations, but have not held the counties accountable for where they place the polling locations, nor for how many machines they put in them.    And the Lege didn't grant any more funding to the SoS to pass down to the counties to pay for those new locations and hours, so they are having to cut early voting locations to fit the additional polling day sites into their budget.   And finding additional election workers is a grind too.   So it's kind of like micro gerrymandering.

    Your idea has merit and gets tossed around a lot, but there's still a loyalty to party that people have out of pride that keeps them from voting Red.  They feel under attack and if and when they can vote, they will vote their party line out of protest and with the hope others are doing so.  The strategy you suggest just isn't something they would ever think of doing.  

  9. I agree with Bozo, it works better on a local level than it does statewide.  The primary to replace Bryan Slaton, House District 2 had a 'jungle' primary.  All candidates were on the same ballot, regardless of party.  So that meant there were no individual party primaries.   Texas does not register you as a D or R or L, that only happens when you vote in one of those parties' primaries.  If you vote in the Dem primary this cycle, you cannot vote in any runoff other than a Dem one.  And same for Red side.   You cannot hold county or precinct chair positions or be a delegate to the state convention if you vote in a republican race.     There are a few other implications, but those are the major ones.

    In a jungle primary there is no party association, so people can cross over during that primary.  This happened in HD 2 where once the local Dem candidate, Kristen Washington, did not gain enough votes to make the runoffs, many of the local Dems went in and cast votes for Jill Dutton over Brent Money.  Money had been endorsed by the 3 evil stooges.  Money did not get sizeable donations from outside the districts, ala Dunn, Wilks or any others.  I guess Abbott and his klan calculated their endorsement alone would win the day.    

    So that was a short term win, and Dutton is no prize, but she's lengths better than Money.  But now they are all on their party ballots again for the 24 primaries, and Dutton will serve out the rest of this term until 1/25 no matter who wins the primary now. 

    Even locally like that, it was only like 100-120 vote difference.  It will be interesting to see the results of a normal primary.  

    https://www.texastribune.org/2024/01/30/brent-money-jill-dutton-texas-house-district-2/

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  10. 3 hours ago, YGIFS said:

    First off, in most races---somebody attempting to primary a prominent incumbent in Texas has to swing even further to the right, correct?  I think we can all agree that's the case usually.  How does one 'out-batshit right tack' Cruz, Patrick, or Abbott?  It's impossible.  There's no flank to their pandering to the stupids.  Nobody's gonna try that angle.  What somebody could do, and I don't fault them for wanting to fight an uphill battle and probably have their children's lives threatened by MAGA lunatics...is some moderate tries to out-primary them by simply getting a few hundred thousand Democrats/Independents to come out and go for them in both a primary and run-off.  For the umpteenth fucking time, I'm not saying it's the Democratic Party of Texas' responsibility to rid us of these three fucking lunatics, but nobody from that party is going to take either of those seats by the end of this decade.  It's just not going to fucking happen and the sooner you make peace with it, the better.  But if they can find a moderate Republican (spare me the 'those do not exist' bullshit) that they can work with, they can turn out just a few hundred thousand of their own plus the fed-up GOP'ers whom would gladly vote against these guys and at least have somebody who's not a fucking monster in office until the demographics switch down the road in the 2030's.  It's not fucking complicated.  It's not the Democrat's fault here, but the system is what it is.  In terms of turnout, it's a +5 state for Republicans (depending on the cycle).  That's just a fact right now.  We can discuss voter suppression in the other thread. 

    The maths are the maths.  And the primary system is the primary system.  Several hundred thousand Democrats would have to be convinced by said primary opponent to Cruz or Patrick to not pull a D ballot in March/May and instead choose to put their ballot chips all in behind this hypothetical moderate candidate on the R-side.  And it's done, it's over with.  Game over for Cruz or Patrick.  Now as soon as it looks dicey for them, they'll change the law that says we all have to be registered and the open primary system is dead, but that's the battle after that.  And we can bitch and moan about this new moderate tilting too far right once in office, but that's the battle after that.  And the battle for blue control down the road is the battle after that.  And on and on and fucking on we go.  The D primary votes for judges in Houston or State rep are largely performative anyway, it's not changing jackshit but in a handful of districts.  

    But wouldn't it just be fucking nice to for a couple of goddamn years to live in a State with no Cruz or Paxton or Patrick.  Sure it'd be somebody most of you don't prefer or even respect, but at least it's not one of these insurrectionist cunts.  Then you can boot 'em out the next cycle.  This is not that fucking difficult, but nope-let's throw another $80mm at Beto for something and act like voting in a GOP primary makes you a fascist.  Oh hey---maybe Wendy Davis will have a third act to her political career, right?  These guys are not going anywhere until you kneecap them in a primary.  

    Another problem is that a lot of counties have no Dems in local races, so if people in Possum Piss need to vote for cousin clyde for constable, they can't vote in the Dem primary.  

  11. 4 hours ago, WBT said:

    This shit needs to ramp up in Texas.  The House has been able to barely hold on under the last 3 speakers but where are the primary challengers to Abbott, Patrick, and Cruz?

    Abbott and Patrick won't be up for re-election until 26.  So far the only Dem who is talking about either is Rep Vicki Goodwin of north Travis Co.  She's in the same mold as Talarico, she's been instrumental in the voucher fight and other hot issues the past few sessions.  It's hard to see these new brighter stars in the Texas lege because the media is constantly focused on the political theater Abbott and his ilk keep producing. 

    There's a really good daily podcast of 10-15 minutes duration that gives you a rundown on things in DC and Austin affecting us.    Progress Texas on Spotify and other platforms.  

    Cruz is up this year and I like Roland Gutierrez.   He's not apologetic about being a Dem and he's not pandering to the right side of the aisle to swing a few never trumper votes.  And while a lot of his campaign focuses on the Uvalde massacre, he has some solid ideas for addressing other issues like immigration, codifying Roe V Wade, etc.  He wants to expand the USSC to match the number of districts, which makes a lot of sense.   Check him out.

     

    • Hook 'Em 3
  12. 2 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

    You’re right. The magazine folded that summer when the donation money went missing. I saved one of the two magazines that were test printed. I figure it’s probably worth around $600. 

    I was thinkin' tree fiddy.  🤷‍♂️

    • Hook 'Em 2
  13. 10 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

    I am more interested in why it’s so impossible to get us to a place where we can have a sensible policy solution and I think we have to talk about our tendency to decide whether a proposal is “good” or “bad” by how it aligns with our deep moral judgments before “does this work?” And this aligns with our Puritan roots, where the state of a person’s heart is more important that the outer realities.  We argue in these terms even when we are non-theists. 

    Sometimes this is good, there needs to be a little alarm that stops us from choosing expediency even when it’s morally abhorrent.  But the tendency in American political competition is to frame EVERYTHING along moralistic lines, even when the alarm bells aren’t going off. I could point to all the people who will gladly go bankrupt and die if the alternative is getting healthy and having money under “socialist” medicine as the example par excellence. 

    Put another way, in Deng Xiaoping thought, he backed off of Maoist dogma and announced “it doesn’t matter if the cat is black or white as long as it catches mice.” 

    Americans REALLY care about the color of the cat. Or more accurately, whether the cat has a the correct motivation to catch the mice. 

    I think a big part of the reason we can't get to sensible policy is that there is this huge push by a mouthy lot to install some sort of theocracy, which then puts some skewed Christian ideals as the centerpiece of our government.  You said earlier that part of addiction is a spiritual problem and the government shouldn't be in the business of trying to fix that.   I won't argue how much of it is spiritual or mental health as that line is hard to define in many cases.  But my point is you can't get where you want to be by having all your considerations be judged by some accepted canon first.  

    Safe sex mentioned earlier how many homeless start out as homosexual teens that are cast out of their homes and their support systems.  By and large who condones parents to treat their children that way?  The churches, who translate their own code of morals to fit their purposes.  So if your government is based on those sorts of things, then they will see every issue through "God's" eye as they interpret it.  That is too susceptible to change on the whims of a single small group, or even a single person who has the charisma to influence the masses.  

    The government should be built and operated on a set of laws that are solid, based on facts that can endure from generation to generation.  We've recently seen how it's been under siege by those who want to run things according to their feelings, instead of the rule of law.

    4 hours ago, Celery Man said:

    Running policy through a morality test before judging it pragmatically could potentially be positive if the this exact base sinful instinct had not already been exploited by evil to remove all of the good from our national morality. It doesn’t work now that our guiding light is entitlement and contempt.

    Now you have to figure out who set up that guiding light and why.   Who is evil?   I'd say the upper elite money people have been spurred on by their greed and competitiveness to turn a great deal of western society into brain dead consumers, and have used the pulpit to help people justify to themselves this move away from serving humanity and their neighbors, to serving the almighty dollar, which a great percentage of ends up in those uber rich pockets.    They instill insecurities in us, then give us ways to feel better than others by introducing the notion it's ok to feel contempt for those different from us, or seemingly worse off.   It's a lose lose for all but the puppetmasters.

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 1
  14. 4 hours ago, crash_davis said:

    So it's our fault because they are homeless druggies? My sarcasm meter is broke.

    Well for some of them, yeah it's our fault, as a collective country.  Many of those homeless druggies are veterans we gladly welcomed into the arms of our military to serve and protect our country.  There's a myriad of reasons these people end up with the short end of the stick, but it maddens me how as a country we ask people to serve, put them in difficult situations, then turn our backs on them once they leave active duty.  Our VA is magnificently underfunded while our defense contractors get fatter and richer.  Then you turn the television on and get hit with a Wounded Warrior commercial.    Excuse me, but isn't that the goverment's job to take care of these people?   

    So yeah it is partly our fault, and one of the reasons many of us look upon the homeless and addicted with compassion, because maybe we (our country) put them in a vulnerable position and refuses to help them when the gamble went south.  

    https://treatmentsolutions.com/treatment/rehab-guide/veterans/homeless-veterans/

    • Hook 'Em 8
    • Like 1
  15. (CNN) — A Jackie Robinson statue that was cut off at the ankles and stolen Thursday from a Little League baseball field in Wichita, Kansas, has been found in a trash can at a different park – burned and in pieces, police say.

    Officers responded to a call Tuesday morning about a trash can fire in Garvey Park, Wichita Police Department spokesperson Andrew Ford said at a Tuesday news conference.

    “Shortly after extinguishing the fire, the fire department saw what appeared to be pieces of the Jackie Robinson statue, which is not salvageable at this time,” Ford said at the news conference.

    League 42, a nonprofit that provides low-cost baseball registration for children, had raised $50,000 for the life-sized statue at its field, according to CNN affiliate KLBY. The league was named after Robinson’s jersey number, honoring the legendary athlete who broke the Major League’s color barrier as a Black player. The theft occurred shortly after midnight Thursday, police have said.

    The theft and arson remain under investigation. On Monday, police said they found a truck believed to be connected to the theft.

    “There will be an arrest but we’re going to make sure that when we do, we will have a solid case,” Wichita Police Chief Joe Sullivan said Tuesday.

    The statue “was a symbol of hope” in the community, Wichita City Council member Brandon Johnson told CNN on Sunday.

    On Tuesday, Johnson described the discovery as “heartbreaking.”

    “I hate to see that the statue was not in one piece,” he told reporters. “I do want everyone to know we are undeterred to make sure that statue gets rebuilt and put back there for our community, for League 42, for young people, that symbol of hope will be only gone for a short time.”

    League 42 will move forward with creating a replica of the statue by the late James Parsons with the same material, director Bob Lutz said at the news conference.

    “Fortunately, the mold from his work is still viable, and the statue that reappears at McAdams Park will be the work of John Parsons,” Lutz said.

    A GoFundMe organized by Lutz has so far raised over $19,000 to replace the statue.

     

    The GoFundMe is up to 156,000/175,000.  

    https://www.gofundme.com/f/replace-our-stolen-jackie-robinson-statue

    • Rage+1 2
  16. On 1/24/2024 at 9:46 PM, Hate said:

    After the great big middle finger JJ gave every single Cowboys fan when he announced McCarthy will be back, I am officially done with this team.  I was already apathetic, but now I genuinely dislike this team.  The only player I really give a shit about is Micah and I mostly feel sorry for him...he's DeMarcus Ware 2.0.  A HOF caliber player that will have to leave to win a title after trying for most of his career in Dallas.  Romo is Dak 2.0. Same as it ever was.  I'm officially out until JJ is under ground.  I fucking HATE what he has done to the Cowboys.

    I don't think JJ going room temperature will make much difference with his imbecile spawn taking charge.  The only way the Cowboys return to winning form is for the Jones family to sell them to someone else.  

×
×
  • Create New...