All Activity

Sure, FBI should investigate, but what happened to conservatives complaining about safe spaces and "derangement syndrome?" Anybody who's worked in a restaurant knows "86" either means we're out of this particular food, or more likely in this specific usage," somebody got kicked out and is banned from the premises. That's likely what Comey meant. Incredibly stupid thing to post knowing that Trump has no qualms about going after political enemies. Just opening yourself up to prosecution, regardless of what you meant.

being accused of thickness by someone thick is rather thick

ever think that maybe they don't want to give credit to biden?

i posted evidence of both... obtuseattack

is the outrage in the room with you right now? stop being a victim

I don’t know about that. Where I live snow plowers are smart. Guys with tiny Willie’s not so much though.

i think the little willie is in the room with you right now

why let facts get in the way of leftists who ALWAYS portray the victim ooooo trump is going to send us to camps blah frikcin blah

no one has ever accused leftists of being smart

Whoa......I am not suggesting any of what you wrote...pretty assinine of you to suggest that. And if you don't get the meaning of the saying just say so instead of conflating what I said into something it wasn't. But again, this should be expected out of you.

https://www.newsweek.com/what-does-86-mean-trump-james-comey-instagram-2073055

After looking at all of the posts so far... I'm not going to pile on here (other than being disappointed at what's resulting from this event.) It DOES bring back this faux commercial from the movie: THE GROOVE TUBE... D3

I agree that they can't rule on something in a way that conflicts with a judicial ruling, but that's not what happened here. It isn't like some judge said, "I've looked at the facts Mr. Snyder and I conclude that you are NOT guilty of solicitation, only of disorderly conduct." Rather the prosecutor just chose to reduce the charges to get a guilty plea. He was never found not guilty of solicitation. That gives SafeSport the window they need to investigate the conduct as originally charged. And, despite my railing against Safesport in the preceding post, I actually do agree that this is what the rule should be, as a general matter. Imagine for a moment that some youth wrestling coach is charged with sexual abuse of minors. But there's problems with the prosecution: maybe the statute of limitations has passed, or the kid is too scared to testify, so the prosecutor, figuring something is better than nothing, accepts a guilty plea for disorderly conduct. Would you, as a wrestling parent, want Safesport to be allowed to look at what the real facts are and make a decision (e.g. a ban) based on those real facts, not the plea? I'm guessing you would. Here I'm just annoyed because even accepting that Safesport is allowed to look at original solicitation charge, there's nothing in the charge that is remotely within Safesport's proper purview, as there's no victim, and no conduct showing it's harmful for him to be in the sport. It's just moral judgment, nothing more, and hypocritical moral judgment at that. Our world team is going to be worse because of their idiocy.

Are the Raney’s the highest rated D1 prospects in awhile to actually plan to spend a significant amount of time training Greco?

every person who had to work their way through school as a water, waitress, dish washer, cook, bar tender knows 86 means: out; cross it off the menu

This is a specious question, but aside from that leveraging debt has been a hallmark of US economic expansion and innovation. What you consider to be good investment, others may not and you'd also have to decide what items are the "extra" over and above revenues. That essentially is what politics is - an big debate about how to allocate resources. That's how you'd decide what is "good" or "bad" debt. My thoughts on what the federal government should invest in over and above annual revenues probably differs from yours, but I do not think that the US government should have zero debt. That's a fallacy of composition. Government investment in infrastructure and research, for instance, is hugely beneficial to our economy - eliminating that is cutting off your nose to spite your face. On a very superficial level, I'm not in favor of policies that create funding gaps the didn't previously exist for things that don't move the economic needle for average folks. If your aim is to reduce revenue, that's fine but offering plans that do not have a corresponding reduction in spending is bad policy for deficit and debt management. The reverse is also true.

thats not what the post is about. a few years ago it was all about words and inciting violence, speech was violence. but now... calling for someones death is just speech

87-1 is 86

wouldn't be the first time an unhinged whacky woke winger wanted it

With Bo Bullrush Bassett? Absolutely.

Great...two of the worst posters ever are back. I'd take 10 RV's over these two guys.

Is it bad that I can’t tell if this is a joke or not?

The larger Raney has a very bad knee. Doubt he'll do much at OSU. It's a known fact that if you want the smaller one you also have to take his brother too.

I admit I have a thing for Trudeau, he's incredibly sexy. Obviously Melania is very attractive so they make a nice looking couple. I'm happy for her - imagine letting gross trumpy get on top of her.

Your jealousy becomes you.