Jump to content

Censored by Laurie

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Days Won

  • Points

    350 [ Donate ]

Everything posted by Censored by Laurie

  1. Wright is really confounding to me. I thought that was a very shrewd pick up, based on his numbers at Washington. He was far from a star, and Washington has been down as a program...but 6pts, 4rbds a game in the Pac12...led UW in boards three times and scoring once, dropping 18 against Arizona...should translate into something that looks more competent and confident out there. I'm hoping it's just a case of him settling in, because if he can give 6/4 a night or so I feel better about our depth.
  2. I agree…I’ll just play homer and also say that you do feel as a shooter like you need to be the tick quicker in release against Kansas than against day UTA. We’ve seen a few unlucky rim-outs…but then a few awful air balls. Drez is the one I’m hoping for a lot more from. He came with a shooters pedigree…had flashes last year, especially against Perdue. As I type this, Zephir and Scott splash one. Thinking if those two or Stone can hit at 30-35% they may need a few more minutes even if there are some other deficiencies in his game (like falling down in the open floor like that)
  3. There were some super soft ones in there…frustrating. As soon as I saw that he was pinned and fighting with their big I knew it was gonna be five
  4. I don’t normally care much about this…but ya, these two on the call are absolutely terrible.
  5. oh I did...but like so many things in life, it just fizzled out. it's reassuring to know though that you're still here giving us typos and brilliant basketball insight like "if we're not hitting shots it's going to be tough to win" and "my second cousin just FaceTimed me and said we look smaller than Kansas". like, honestly...what is it you think your contribution to a basketball conversation really is?
  6. We should probably fire Grant on the strength of your text thread
  7. well...I see the sports-intelligence level of posters hasn't improved...so see ya.
  8. right? not happy someone got hurt, obviously...but it's kinda a good bit. how many avatars and sig lines here would have the UNT battle flag shish-kabobbing Peruna at Ford if we'd done that?
  9. why do you hate Texas? Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1420, Sec. 7.001, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. Sec. 3100.070. LIMITATIONS ON DISPLAY. (a) The state flag should not: (1) touch anything beneath it, including the ground or floor; (2) be dipped to any person or thing, except as a mark of honor for the United States flag; (3) trail in water; (4) have placed on any part of it, or attached to it, any mark, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing; (5) be used or stored in a manner in which it can easily be soiled or damaged; (6) be used as a receptacle for receiving, holding, carrying, or delivering anything; (7) be displayed on a float in a parade, except from a staff or in the manner provided by Section 3100.059; (8) be draped over the hood, top, side, or back of any vehicle, train, boat, or aircraft; (9) be used as bedding or drapery; (10) be festooned or drawn back or up in folds, but instead allowed to fall free; or (11) be used as a covering for a ceiling. (b) Advertising should not be fastened to a flagpole, flagstaff, or halyard on which the state flag is displayed. (c) Bunting of blue, white, and red, arranged with the blue above, the white in the middle, and the red below, should be used instead of the state flag to cover a speaker's desk or to drape the front of a platform and for decoration in general.
  10. I mean if we're really being honest, we're memorializing military leaders who didn't follow orders, directly leading to the deaths of their entire battalion...and in truth that real estate is probably better utilized anyway...by maybe an H&M or Jamba Juice?
  11. more so than the fervent defenders of "our history" that didn't know/care about a statue/flag/building name until someone different than them challenged it's place and significance in this era? at best it's a push.
  12. I think put simply, the purple area of the Anti-Vaxxer Venn Diagram makes up the oddest cross-section of the American population that agrees on anything...really, I'd love to see them all in a room together...mostly because I think they'd all kill one another and save us all a lot of hassle. the original and most vocal anti-MMR Vax campaign was largely made up of affluent SoCal liberals...a group I like to call Nouveau New-Agers...basically they're the same group of people who pay $15,000 a week for yoga and meditation retreats in Sedona and VIP turn-key camps at Burning Man...largely annoying capitalistic "hippies" this group is still largely extending that philosophy to the Covid vaccine...I have a few of this type in my friend circle (though on the mild end of the annoying scale lest they wouldn't be my friends)...their argument is largely that they don't want to put non-natural/synthesized chemicals into their body (this despite my having done copious amounts of LSD and MDMA with them...) I think rather clearly and obviously though, the largest and loudest group of anti-Covid vaxxers are certainly extreme right, Trump, Q-Anon, etc supporters. I think it's just the next extension from 18+ months of denial and downplaying of the severity of the virus/pandemic...the "personal freedom" over "collective good" crowd...anti-lockdown, anti-mask, anti-vax...it's a pretty consistent lineage. a pretty easy litmus test...if your anti-vaxxer is telling you that amethyst crystals, palo santo and lavender tinctures will keep them healthy, then they're likely liberals...if a person is eating $500 worth of chemicals from Grainger and telling you Jesus will keep them safe from Covid, well you're likely talking to a conservative. hope this all helps.
  13. oh, I knew exactly what article he was going to link. Not just an opinion piece, but one co-authored by one of the developers of Ivermectin…and an opinion piece that a day later the WSJ published a retraction on due to one of studies cited had been discredited.
  14. maybe this is a church-y thing that I don't know about, but "he finished well"?!? that's...uhh...that's weird.
  15. since my reputation precedes me, I'll preface by saying I think his is a massive cluster-eff...and ya, ultimate responsibility falls at Biden's feet. you did what the last two presidents attempted/wanted to do...it farted and fell down, so it's your mess. that said, I think both sentimental and pragmatic intentions of the Biden administration were correct...we can not just continue "nation building" and fighting proxy wars into eternity...20 years is an staggering number. I think whether you're "anti-war" or "America First", there is common ground to be had that remaining in Afghanistan ad infinitum is unsustainable. I'm also not "someone needs to be fired" guy...but ya...if you're heading an intelligence agency and said it'd take 18 months for the Taliban to be ready to take Kabul, you probably shouldn't be in your post anymore. to LJ's article...I've no idea why that has been the talking-point verbage...but I will at least offer the suggestion that some American operatives truly do not want to leave. my assumption is that we have had officials and officers in post for 10+ years...hell, we might have people there since the Bush administration...those people have dedicated lives and livelihoods to this cause and to just shrug-emoji now probably is antithetical to all they've done. and I'm also going to assume that many of those lifers also have relationships with Taliban leaders...and they're possibly in a position where the do have legitimate influence on the nature of how things are unfolding
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.