All Activity

Your poll seems inaccurate. Burroughs didn't get all Gold correct, he had some non gold world/Olympic?

I have a hard time finding fault with anyone who tried to stay out of going to Vietnam. The worst military debacle in American history. 58,281 names on the Wall in Washington DC. Over 94,000 Vietnam vets died from suicide after coming home. Over 300,000 died from being sprayed with Agent Orange and ingesting it in their food and water. To top it off they were treated (by Americans) like dirt when they arrived home from Vietnam. The way our leadership had our military fight the war the war was criminal. Read up on it. One of the awards I received in high school was in honor of a former wrestler who was killed in Vietnam.

Got it. So if they have that particular flag or banner in their possession, then they're a terrorist. Arrest them then, right?

I would say the english rules are showing an interesting juxtaposition. It was muslim extremists that killed all of those people in NYC just over 20 years ago. Now there is a muslim extremist running to be NYC mayor and ahead in the polls. You have to find that interesting if nothing else. mspart

This is so far off topic. No one is debating is or is not Charlie Kirk awful. There is a different thread for that. this is you yet again with your semi close ish condoning of his murder. you left off the obligatory, I don’t really mean it, but he didn’t deserve to be killed for it line though. Poor form.

I think it will look like 57- Spencer Lee 65- Forrest/Mendez/Blaze/Valencia 74- Mesenbrink/Carr/Duke/Haines/Shapiro 86- Zahid/Trent/Starocci/Dake/Barr 97- Snyder/Barr 125- Parris/Hendrickson

They had 48 last year They have 37 this year They gained 17 from portal and new freshman. So that means they lost 28 people from graduation, transfer, or HEW

Can you let me know what the English rules say is being implied here? Just two completely unrelated sentences that have nothing to do with each other I’m sure…

Funny how according to the polls Kamala was passing Trump before and until Nov 2 2024 the relevelant time pertaining to my comment about Cheney rebuttals and opinion changing; and then what happened? Oh and didn't Iowa flip just before this? A little loony on their part!

Shamil Mamedov completed his transfer to Bulgaria. I think he'll be eligible to compete in 2026 . Also he is 2_0 against current champ Amouzad .

Help me understand which types of threats are credible and which ones are not? from which politicians does a threat become more or less credible and do they force companies to do stuff on their behalf? One threat is bad for the first amendment a similar threat is not ?

I'll take your deflection and projection to mean that you know your position is untenable.

What kind of threat is a real threat? Until a threat materializes it’s just words and political grandstanding on tv. any of these knuckle heads abusing the first amendment?

I'm wrong about selective outrage? I'm sure Ross has a nice AI list he can post that shows all the grievances conservatives have about whatever they're supposed to be upset about this week, but that doesn't mean selective outrage is a one-way street. To argue otherwise might be the most intellectually dishonest position anyone has ever tried to take on this board - and that's saying something. https://archive.ph/fsOoa - Not that I expect anything to satisfy your standard of proof, but I sidestepped the paywall for you. Even hyper-partisan Ted Cruz knows what it is. Maybe you prefer Fox News, who classified it as a threat: https://www.foxnews.com/media/fcc-chair-levels-threat-against-abc-disney-after-kimmel-suggested-charlie-kirk-assassin-maga Feel free to use the Google machine for countless other reports.

Yes, reports indicate that Disney and ABC executives warned Jimmy Kimmel before suspending his show indefinitely on September 17, 2025 . The network reportedly hoped to "de-escalate" the situation following his comments about conservative activist Charlie Kirk's death, but Kimmel refused to apologize and instead planned another heated monologue, leading to his suspension. Key details from the events leading to the suspension: Warning to "de-escalate": Disney Entertainment co-chair Dana Walden reportedly told Kimmel that executives were concerned his planned remarks would further inflame tensions. Refusal to apologize: Insiders told media outlets that Kimmel was unwilling to apologize for his earlier on-air comments regarding Kirk's death. Unapproved monologue: When executives reviewed Kimmel's planned monologue for the September 17 show, they became concerned that he would "double down" on his previous remarks and attack supporters of former President Trump. This was perceived as a step too far for the network. The suspension call: Ultimately, Disney CEO Bob Iger and Dana Walden made the final call to indefinitely suspend Jimmy Kimmel Live!. yes I got from ai

You would have to make a point to have one boss

The FCC guy essentially said that their license can be pulled if they are not broadcasting in the public interest as per the law. Spreading lies to an audience when the truth is known is definitely not in the public interest. ABC went to Kimmel who planned a major rebuttal to the FCC guy and MAGA in general and was going full on into the fracas. ABC asked him not to and he said NO. So ABC said no to him. When it has been amply explained that the shooter was influenced by leftist ideology to say that MAGA is doing everything they can to not have him be one of them. That is saying the shooter is MAGA in the face of the facts. The way he said it makes it so, he cannot back peddle that at all. It is out there for all to see. My personal opinion is that this kind of FCC scrutiny needs to be applied everywhere. You say something is fact, you better have the facts to prove it. Simple. Opinion is a different thing. But it needs to be known it is opinion, not fact. If we want our news to be all opinion so be it. But then how would we ever know what is true or not. That is essentially how we are living right now. We have to search many places to decide what is true and what is not. The broadcasters have an obligation to say what is true and back it up. And the back up has to have all the context, not snippets or sound bites taken out of context. Charlie Kirks statement about guns is classic. Everyone is all upset because he said a few deaths is worth it to maintain the 2nd amendment. But he stated before that that we don't criminalize cars even though there are 60k deaths a year. The general public has determined the risk is worth it for the convenience, automony, etc. Same with guns. But that isn't mentioned. So non of that kind of crap should be on broadcast news without full context. No more cheap shots. Just the facts ma'am, just the facts. mspart

Your constant evasiveness proves my point for me.