Author Topic: Judge to Rutgers?  (Read 33061 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #175 on: April 03, 2013, 07:00:02 PM »
BITB didn't really say that though, did he? He referenced not being able to scream "man of taste and distinction" specifically?

No he didn't say that at all. He said saying "the f-word of sexual preference" is what got Rice fired because you can't say that "in this day and age". His main point was the other actions (grabbing, shoving, throwing balls, cussing) happen "all the time" in college basketball and the media blow up is ridiculous. Referenced stories about Self and Roy throwing balls, kicking balls, etc.

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64043
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #176 on: April 03, 2013, 07:26:57 PM »
Self and Roy throwing balls, kicking balls, etc.

punching balls?
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #177 on: April 03, 2013, 10:47:16 PM »

oscar to Rutgers to bring peace, calm, and chicken nuggets? Could be a good fit after Rice. 

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46508
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #178 on: April 04, 2013, 08:04:49 AM »

oscar to Rutgers to bring peace, calm, and chicken nuggets? Could be a good fit after Rice. 

LMFAO!   :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline XocolateThundarr

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5224
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #179 on: April 04, 2013, 09:01:45 AM »

oscar to Rutgers to bring peace, calm, and chicken nuggets? Could be a good fit after Rice. 

CALM THE WATERS
@mikec2w

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #180 on: April 05, 2013, 12:56:56 AM »
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline EMAWmeister

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 8957
  • Livin' it up
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #181 on: April 05, 2013, 03:08:11 AM »
Well I mean obviously you can't say man of taste and distinction nowadays, but the reason people dont say that is because its wong

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #182 on: April 05, 2013, 07:23:55 AM »
Judge going to the mat for his coach
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/22008810/two-rutgers-players-come-to-fired-rices-defense
Yeah, that's the only guy on the team I wouldn't want speaking out. He doesn't know normal.

Offline hatingfrancisco

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4516
    • View Profile
    • Tweet Tweet

Offline chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21917
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #184 on: April 05, 2013, 09:02:02 AM »
AD's been fired.  I love a good PR disaster.

Offline Sandstone Outcropping

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 8692
  • a punk who rarely ever took advice
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #185 on: April 05, 2013, 09:39:16 AM »
Judge going to the mat for his coach
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/22008810/two-rutgers-players-come-to-fired-rices-defense

Quote
"You can't let those individual moments define what he was," junior forward Wally Judge said during a telephone interview Thursday. "In my past two years, me being an older guy and being under other coaches, I have grown from the moment I stepped in these doors, not only as a player but also as a person because of how he has treated me."
:surprised:

Offline Mixed-Nutz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3411
  • Square
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #186 on: April 05, 2013, 09:45:55 AM »
Judge going to the mat for his coach
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/22008810/two-rutgers-players-come-to-fired-rices-defense

Quote
"You can't let those individual moments define what he was," junior forward Wally Judge said during a telephone interview Thursday. "In my past two years, me being an older guy and being under other coaches, I have grown from the moment I stepped in these doors, not only as a player but also as a person because of how he has treated me."
:surprised:
Frank couldn't of been that bad, wouldn't even call him by name.

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #187 on: April 05, 2013, 01:19:34 PM »
Chris Harper ?@THEChrisHarper 11m
I dont care what nobody says! Me & the coach from Rutgers woulda fought! Then he woulda quit!

:D

Offline ShellShock

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 980
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #188 on: April 05, 2013, 02:40:40 PM »
Throw me into the "kids are too soft" crowd...

Coach was fired up and intense don't get me wrong...but he never showed malicious intent to hurt any of the players.

If the players or coaches didn't like it, then they have every right to leave and play for someone else.

The fact that his boss only suspended him for 3 games should say enough...this whole thing was blown up way out of proportion after the liberal media got ahold of the footage.

Offline EMAWmeister

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 8957
  • Livin' it up
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #189 on: April 05, 2013, 02:46:52 PM »
Throw me into the "kids are too soft" crowd...

Coach was fired up and intense don't get me wrong...but he never showed malicious intent to hurt any of the players.

If the players or coaches didn't like it, then they have every right to leave and play for someone else.

The fact that his boss only suspended him for 3 games should say enough...this whole thing was blown up way out of proportion after the liberal media got ahold of the footage.

Oh jesus christ

Offline Panjandrum

  • 5 o'clock Shadow Enthusiast
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 11221
  • Amateur magician and certified locksmith.
    • View Profile
    • Bring on the Cats [An SB Nation Blog]
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #190 on: April 05, 2013, 04:34:54 PM »
Throw me into the "kids are too soft" crowd...

Coach was fired up and intense don't get me wrong...but he never showed malicious intent to hurt any of the players.

If the players or coaches didn't like it, then they have every right to leave and play for someone else.

The fact that his boss only suspended him for 3 games should say enough...this whole thing was blown up way out of proportion after the liberal media got ahold of the footage.

 :facepalm:

Offline CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 36685
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #191 on: April 05, 2013, 04:49:15 PM »
A bully like that is the same bully that will deny a kid transferring if he is worth anything. 


Honestly, I don't worry about the cursing/homophobia/insults.  Ppl are stupid and you will hear that no matter who you are if you interact with ppl enough.

However, that rough ridin' coward kicked a kid and threw god knows how many balls at ppls heads over the last three yrs.

I am even ok with they way he grabbed jerseys and stuff.  Make the ball throws hard passes to the chest when you have the kids attention, and I would be fine with that too. 

Dive bombing them like that and kicking to add extra emphasis is way over the line though and ppl that don't understand that were raised wrong.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2013, 04:52:57 PM by CNS Casey »

The Big Train

  • Guest
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #192 on: April 06, 2013, 12:03:12 AM »
Throw me into the "kids are too soft" crowd...

Coach was fired up and intense don't get me wrong...but he never showed malicious intent to hurt any of the players.

If the players or coaches didn't like it, then they have every right to leave and play for someone else.

The fact that his boss only suspended him for 3 games should say enough...this whole thing was blown up way out of proportion after the liberal media got ahold of the footage.

 :facepalm:

 :facepalm:  :facepalm:

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #193 on: April 06, 2013, 12:05:42 AM »
Throw me into the "kids are too soft" crowd...

Coach was fired up and intense don't get me wrong...but he never showed malicious intent to hurt any of the players.

If the players or coaches didn't like it, then they have every right to leave and play for someone else.

The fact that his boss only suspended him for 3 games should say enough...this whole thing was blown up way out of proportion after the liberal media got ahold of the footage.

 :facepalm:

 :facepalm:  :facepalm:

 :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13574
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #194 on: April 06, 2013, 12:30:54 AM »
Throw me into the "kids are too soft" crowd...

Coach was fired up and intense don't get me wrong...but he never showed malicious intent to hurt any of the players.

If the players or coaches didn't like it, then they have every right to leave and play for someone else.

The fact that his boss only suspended him for 3 games should say enough...this whole thing was blown up way out of proportion after the liberal media got ahold of the footage.

 :facepalm:

 :facepalm:  :facepalm:

 :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

 :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #195 on: April 06, 2013, 12:39:52 AM »
Throw me into the "kids are too soft" crowd...

Coach was fired up and intense don't get me wrong...but he never showed malicious intent to hurt any of the players.

If the players or coaches didn't like it, then they have every right to leave and play for someone else.

The fact that his boss only suspended him for 3 games should say enough...this whole thing was blown up way out of proportion after the liberal media got ahold of the footage.

 :facepalm:

 :facepalm:  :facepalm:

 :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

 :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Excellent and well-thought post, Carnes. I think it captures the collective feeling of our majority. Well done.

The Big Train

  • Guest
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #196 on: April 06, 2013, 12:46:19 AM »
Throw me into the "kids are too soft" crowd...

Coach was fired up and intense don't get me wrong...but he never showed malicious intent to hurt any of the players.

If the players or coaches didn't like it, then they have every right to leave and play for someone else.

The fact that his boss only suspended him for 3 games should say enough...this whole thing was blown up way out of proportion after the liberal media got ahold of the footage.

 :facepalm:

 :facepalm:  :facepalm:

 :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

 :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Excellent and well-thought post, Carnes. I think it captures the collective feeling of our majority. Well done.

 :thumbs:

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13574
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #197 on: April 06, 2013, 12:47:20 AM »
 :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13574
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #198 on: April 06, 2013, 12:47:56 AM »
 :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13574
    • View Profile
Re: Judge to Rutgers?
« Reply #199 on: April 06, 2013, 12:48:14 AM »
 :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: