Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - treysolid

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 75
1
So, is it safe to say this Boris guy wanted to gain popularity by being pro-leave, but didn't think it'd actually happen and doesn't want to actually deal with it?

Lots of people think that Cameron resigned quickly to ensure that Boris had to deal with all the fallout/details.  They are nemeses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As he should. eff Boris.

2
Whooping your kids is a part of black culturs.  This mom thought what she did was right for her mids.  But here comes the PC crowd.  Just like they did for Adrian Peterson.  Many of these self proclaimed kid protectors believe abortion is fine.   I don't understand their schizophrenic veiws about protecting kids.  How dare we try to mold the behavior of a child.  We have passed beyond babarism.  I don't believe in this type of punishment personally, but we can't deny this right to others.

oh crap, I haven't read the constitution in a really long time - which amendment is it that allows you to beat your kids?

3
Whooping your kids is a part of black culturs.  This mom thought what she did was right for her mids.  But here comes the PC crowd.  Just like they did for Adrian Peterson.  Many of these self proclaimed kid protectors believe abortion is fine.   I don't understand their schizophrenic veiws about protecting kids.  How dare we try to mold the behavior of a child.  We have passed beyond babarism.  I don't believe in this type of punishment personally, but we can't deny this right to others.

I would disagree that hitting your kids is a part of "black culture," but even if something is a part of your culture, does that make it ok? You could make an argument that female genital mutilation is part of the culture of different African societies - does that make it acceptable?

4
I think most of what you said is certainly possible.  I don't know how you square 1 with 2 tho, either the EU was important or it wasn't--> there is either a bunch of economic fallout and UK reclaims its "sovereignty" or there is very little disruption substantively to the trade agreements.

i mean, it really just depends entirely on what agreements replace it.  i kinda agree with fsd that the new structures will pretty much keep almost all of the trade continuity and probably also most of the movement of labor/exchange of social services.

My biggest fear is that European separatists start to fracture all the nation states at the same time that the international institutions fail and that it starts with the UK (Scotland, Northern Ireland) then spreads to Spain (Catalonia, Gibraltar, basque) then to Italy (North/South) etc.

i think your fear confuses cause and effect.  i would also conjecture that scotland would only leave the uk if they are guaranteed entry into the eu, so that would actually strengthen the eu.  i think your other proposed fractures would also strengthen the eu (small states need the common market more than large states. really, the idea of splitting off these little micro nationalities into states is only viable within a framework like the eu).

best case scenario, the uk moves to eu lite by another name, the continental members remain and the eu becomes more responsive to member states complaints.  it's not hard to see this being a net positive long-term.

i think it's a much more scary situation than that. right-wing leaders in Finland, Austria, the Netherlands, France and Hungary are already calling on in/out referendums in those countries. the EU was set up to stop Europe from tearing itself apart after WWII by linking them economically, considering that the power vacuums that existed after WWI lead directly to the next great war. if the stronger, more populous and more prosperous countries leave the EU, it has two really negative consequences in my mind. The first is that it exacerbates the Syrian refugee crisis by leaving countries that are wholly ill-equipped to handle it all alone. The second is that it will more than likely embolden Russia to become more aggressive towards EU countries in general and the Baltic states specifically, and there is a high likelihood that Russia will do to those countries what it's been doing to Ukraine for the past 3 years.

5
is the fact that the mom is black relevant??

6
Britain was sending about £200MM to the EU weekly. Now, they'll have to spend more than that each week just to have access to the European markets plus more for all the restructuring.

7
The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: quote-brexit-unquote
« on: June 24, 2016, 08:14:39 AM »
Britain will have a tough go of it negotiating their own trade partnerships. And if Scotland leaves and takes their oil with them...yikes.

8
So underwhelming. Hopefully this doesn't impact our status with Marquis Hayes.

9
The 3 greatest areas of need for this class are OL, DL, and DB.

I'd like for us to get Marquis Hayes and then call it a day with the OL.
We still need 2 DEs and another DT (My realistic preferences are Owen Carney, David Porter, and Walter Palmore)

For those who like stars, there are only three 4-star players (currently holding offers) who we have any legit chance with (Hayes, Carney, and WR Chad Terrell).

10
Eli Huggins just committed

11
Why haven't we offered Anthony Payne?

Because it would be a waste of time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Payne will get an offer the second Owen Carney commits elsewhere.

12
josh rivas just committed

13
watch their film. harrison looks really slow and stiff and struggles against 190-lb KS DL. adler is quick, plays mean, and pancakes everyone.

14
Another OL commit. Ben Adler from Wichita fwiw.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like this commitment much more than the harrison creed commitment.

15
The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Orlando shooting. Sad.
« on: June 20, 2016, 11:06:31 AM »
http://www.thoughtsandprayersthegame.com/

149 T&Ps in 30 s, you guys. That's republican senator status, right there.

17
There should be a pretty high tax for the lowest income providing an incentive to earn more money and be taxed less.

This is the dumbest rough ridin' thing I've ever heard

18
The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Orlando shooting. Sad.
« on: June 15, 2016, 09:47:27 PM »
Hint:

We are all capable of identifying a bad act and perhaps even a good one. We, of course, were all born with a foundational understanding of a set of morals.

This, however, does not go far in answering THE question.

Their lives were not his to take. He stole from the Many-Faced God.

19
The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Orlando shooting. Sad.
« on: June 14, 2016, 08:37:11 PM »
jihadis may hate us, but they love our gun laws:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpRQzTP8H1o

20
The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Orlando shooting. Sad.
« on: June 13, 2016, 02:46:24 PM »
in 2015, there were ~350 mass shootings in this country. so far this year, there have been 133. only 3 of those (Chattanooga, San Bernadino and now Orlando) have been linked to radical islam. So while radical islam is a problem, it's a very, very, very tiny part of a major epidemic.

There are over 100 million gun owners in this country and 99.9%+ of them have managed to own guns without "mass shooting" people.

Also, lol at libtards redifining "mass shooting" to rope in regular homicides (largely drug related) with these unmotivated random acts of violence. Do you really need to inflate the numbers to air your gestapo pov? So disingenous.

In the numbers I gave, "mass shooting" refers to an incident with 4 or more victims and doesn't count gang-related activity.

You do realize that your "you can't treat a whole group of people a certain way just because a small percentage of them do something bad" argument also applies to equally to muslims, right?

21
The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Orlando shooting. Sad.
« on: June 13, 2016, 11:34:19 AM »
in 2015, there were ~350 mass shootings in this country. so far this year, there have been 133. only 3 of those (Chattanooga, San Bernadino and now Orlando) have been linked to radical islam. So while radical islam is a problem, it's a very, very, very tiny part of a major epidemic.
Good point. Let's ignore this historic mass shooting that was radical islam driven. Look at the percentages. No big deal.

JFC, wacky. talk about not being able to see the forest for the trees. no one is ignoring this shooting, but we need to put it in proper context.

22
The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Orlando shooting. Sad.
« on: June 13, 2016, 11:15:55 AM »
in 2015, there were ~350 mass shootings in this country. so far this year, there have been 133. only 3 of those (Chattanooga, San Bernadino and now Orlando) have been linked to radical islam. So while radical islam is a problem, it's a very, very, very tiny part of a major epidemic.


23
The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Orlando shooting. Sad.
« on: June 12, 2016, 11:50:17 PM »
Sounds like we have a real pickle here. We NEED to have background checks before ANYONE can buy an ASSAULT rifle (the scary looking ones the epa uses) to make sure MENTALLY ILL people can't get them, BUT the "background" check has to be prospective because you only become violent crazy spontaneously, and in any event the constitution, as interpreted, allows ANYONE to buy a gun whenever they want no matter their background, which is no good, because of the spontaneous nature of violent mental illness.

Fantasy land is a complex place.

Actually, the biggest motivation for having background checks isn't to make sure the mentally ill can't get guns, but to make sure people with violent criminal backgrounds can't get guns. You're really avoiding this mental health screening issue. I mean, you don't want to talk about it at all, likely because you have no clue how that would work in real life. You just heard Wayne LaPierre say it one day and thought it sounded good.

Are you rough ridin' joking?  The kdhe is up in your kids' crap before they're a day old.

^ not a plan. A plan, FSD, provides concrete steps that can be taken to achieve a desired goal. You could have said something like "anyone wanting to buy a gun must undergo a thorough psych evaluation before they are allowed to take possession of the firearm. they will then have to submit to psych evaluations on a yearly basis. if they fail the evaluation or skip their evaluation meeting, their firearms will be denied/confiscated." but i don't know, obviously not your strong suit.

24
The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Orlando shooting. Sad.
« on: June 12, 2016, 11:25:27 PM »
Sounds like we have a real pickle here. We NEED to have background checks before ANYONE can buy an ASSAULT rifle (the scary looking ones the epa uses) to make sure MENTALLY ILL people can't get them, BUT the "background" check has to be prospective because you only become violent crazy spontaneously, and in any event the constitution, as interpreted, allows ANYONE to buy a gun whenever they want no matter their background, which is no good, because of the spontaneous nature of violent mental illness.

Fantasy land is a complex place.

Actually, the biggest motivation for having background checks isn't to make sure the mentally ill can't get guns, but to make sure people with violent criminal backgrounds can't get guns. You're really avoiding this mental health screening issue. I mean, you don't want to talk about it at all, likely because you have no clue how that would work in real life. You just heard Wayne LaPierre say it one day and thought it sounded good.

25
The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Orlando shooting. Sad.
« on: June 12, 2016, 11:07:17 PM »
Yes, making the scary looking guns more illegal (super illegal?) is the only way to solve this problem. And we all know people spontaneously go crazy, no way to prevent it.

Let's create a system of laws governing the freedom of 300+ million law abiding citizens based upon the actions of a handful of murdering psychopaths. That's the rational approach.

A). WTF are you talking about?? AR-15's aren't illegal.

B). You didn't address my point. How do you pre-screen every american citizen for mental illness?

Or, you don't care because you're fine that mass shootings are now our new normal?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 75