Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/20/2019 in all areas

  1. 5 points
    If he was only concerned with the accuracy of the slogan he'd have just slightly changed the wording to "We Fail!!!"
  2. 3 points
    at last, an end to the nightmare that's been this franchise i don't know why we don't look to tampa more often for answers
  3. 3 points
    Ok. Dan Snyder is one of my least favorite people right now. But... A. Why is this even news?!?!? B. What, if anything, did he do wrong here? He's done a lot wrong outside of this, but this is dumb, a waste of time, and nothing to see here, move along IMO.
  4. 2 points
    I might be starting to fall in line with the guys who want to suck this year for 2020. Not because I think the 2020 guys are better than Haskins, but because I think we have a chance to really solidify our defense and if we are bad enough next year, we will be choosing in a more natural QB range. It's just a better long term use of resources if you wind up with a QB that is just as good. I'm still not convinced that Tua is better than Haskins. And I think Haskins is significantly better than Fromm and Herbert. In terms of resource allocation, I think that teams find CB's with much more ease in the later rounds. Maybe it's just my mistaken impression, but I feel like most 12 sack pass rushers are first round guys. I think I'd be inclined to draft Polite over Murphy if their grade is equal, just based on positional value. I think Murphy is the better player though, honestly, and also fits a need. Thoughts? edit: Most of these guys were higher picks. http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/defense/sort/sacks/seasontype/2
  5. 2 points
    The funny thing is, as the article points out, "sieg heil" translated into english is "hail victory". Which is a line in the Redskins fight song. So snyder has a problem with a slogan that only faintly resembles the english translation of "sieg heil", but has no problem with the actual english translation of that phrase in the fight song? Sounds more to me like something being used as a pathetic excuse to justify firing Lafemina and his colleagues.
  6. 2 points
    Sure, Dan may land a coveted coach again...in a coaching market where there are more coveted candidates than there are openings. Washington will never be a coveted place to be a head coach until the FO is right. In every industry, one of the most important things is who you report to.
  7. 1 point
    I thought that paragraph was interesting too, but more so because it was the DEPUTY ag office that called them. That might provide support to the idea that Rosenstein is still the one overseeing, not Whitaker.
  8. 1 point
    If Hazard is off they’ll need a lot more.
  9. 1 point
  10. 1 point
  11. 1 point
    Are we able to disucss this because I’d like to, but almost anything we say is political given it is about political history.
  12. 1 point
  13. 1 point
  14. 1 point
    i have to regularly remind some of the guys in bigfoot country that maga hats are not the same as antlers to the dep't of fish & wildlife
  15. 1 point
    Came here to joke "what part of Tampa is he from hur hur" Then read the first line of his resume.
  16. 1 point
    This is long, AOC speaks truth here. “Please allow me to frame the issues involved with "the wall" in its actual terms. Despite what the media is saying, this is not about Democrat vs. Republican. In short, the executive branch of our government is threatening to declare a national emergency since the legislative branch will not authorize the seizure of private American property for a federal works project nor will fund it. The executive branch has already shut down the federal government. It is currently threatening to extend this government shut down for however long it takes for the legislative branch to cave. Let us break this down. First of all, the framework of our government is based on checks and balances. Power is divided into three branches: the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial. The Legislative branch controls the purse strings of government and creates laws. The Executive branch carries out those laws. The Judicial branch tells us whether the laws are constitutional or not. Each branch was designed to be able to balance the other branches. Why? As shown by our original rebellion, Americans didn't want a King or a Dictator when we were setting up our government. We were not particularly thrilled with a House of Lords telling us what we could or could not do either. In this case, the executive branch wants to: (1) take governmental cash, (2) create its own law, (3) take away private property from American citizens (4) create its own federal works project. At least three of these functions fall within the power/ responsibility of the legislative branch. So, what is the problem? This is one of the most naked power grabs by the executive branch over the others in recent history. Once that power is exercised, it is going to be difficult or impossible to regain any balance again. The executive branch was never meant to have that much power (see our country's previous concerns about Kings and Dictators). Is this constitutional? Very doubtful. Should all Americans be concerned? That is a question for you to answer yourself. Second, a "National Emergency" is generally declared under these general conditions: (1) Natural disasters including hurricanes, tornados, and earthquakes to name a few. (2) Public health emergencies such as significant outbreaks of infectious diseases. (3) Military attacks. (4) Civil insurrection. (5) Any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy. Now the first 4 aren't applicable. The last category was meant to be short-term only. It was designed to be reviewed by the legislative branch every year after it’s enacted (because again; the check and balance is fundamental to how we operate). So, what is the problem here? If national emergencies can be declared by the executive branch for non-emergency purposes which vest power in one branch of the government why would that branch ever let go of that power again? Third, the seizure of private property (known as “eminent domain”, a body of law which says the government cannot just take your home without due process). You are joking, right? No. The US/Mexican border is 1,933 miles long. It runs through 4 states (California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas). Only 33% of that land is actually owned or managed by the Federal Government. A sizable percentage of that land is owned by the Indian nations. It is land preserved for those tribes by treaty and land given under treaty is not land owned by the United States. These tribes already have a lot of reasons to be angry at the Federal Government. This would be pouring additional gas on an open flame. The other 64% of that land is privately owned. How much land would have to be taken? The amount of land that the Federal Government would have to take would likely run 1,237 miles long to 12,371 miles deep (assuming a 1 to 10-mile DMZ from the border into the United States). Even if we could only take 100 to 500 ft of land in densely populated areas, that is a lot of private property that is going to be seized by the Federal government. The land necessary for this project would also run through some highly populated areas in the US such as San Diego, Calexico, Nogales, El Paso, and Laredo. There will be a lot of Americans who are going to have their homes and businesses taken by the federal government. Which will also mean a lot of lawsuits. In terms of the federal works project, these types of works include hospitals, bridges, highways, walls and dams. These projects may be funded by local, state, or federal appropriations. If they are federal, they are funded by the legislative branch of our government (the same branch that our executive branch is currently trying to take power from). Is the seizure of power constitutional? Not likely given the separation of powers discussed above. Finally, these considerations do not take into account the sheer cost, human and monetary, that will be involved. The Department of Homeland Security estimates the current cost at $21 billion for construction alone (not counting costs of maintenance or costs associated with increased military/federal patrolling). Ask yourself a simple question. When was the last time that you saw a governmental project brought in under time and under budget? Does anyone remember the “big dig” in Boston, Mass? The actual costs are likely to be much higher. This estimated cost also does not include compensating folks for taking their land or the associated impact upon their businesses. The Federal budget deficit grew to $779 billion dollars in 2018 according to the Treasury Department. How are we, as a country, going to fund this project? How are we, as a country, going to deal with the additional debt? Unlike private businesses, our country cannot declare bankruptcy. This is not about Democrat vs. Republican. It is not about who has the best zingers measured in 10 second sound bites. It is about our country. The core of this issue deals with the profound and immense changes the outcome will have on the structure of our nation. This is the way that we, as a country, should be framing these issues. Please think about it.” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
  17. 1 point
  18. 1 point
    Hmmmm........sounds familiar.
  19. 1 point
    If he truly wanted to win, he would do things like successful owners do. Dan always does things different. He's never hired a GM who wasn't a complete lackey. He wants to do things his way more than he wants to win. It's undeniable at this point. You don't hire Cerrato twice, then keep Bruce Allen around for a decade if you just want to win.
  20. 1 point
    Just do a 2nd ****ing referendum. Jeebus. EU isn't gonna give UK something that could pass Parliament, and a no deal Brexit is a terrible terrible idea, that, at a minimum, should be put to a vote. That's probably May's only way to a moderately positive history book portrayal. 2nd referendum. If Remain wins, apologize for the tantrum and get back into the EU. If Leave wins, no deal Brexit and the people have no one to blame but themselves. As of right now the entire government looks dumb, with them all wanting things they can't have and barreling towards something that people don't want (no deal Brexit) while not making it clear that the Unicorn and Rainbows version of Brexit was a lie and that they really really need to be sure they want this, and the best way to determine that is through a vote.
  21. 1 point
    the above lines of thought also raise the troubling question of do we want the kind of guy who would be willing to take a job like this and work for dan i mean that guy must make the kind of life judgments you hear at your first rehab meetings which reminds me i need a drink hey, that right there would qualify me for a top exec position at the park
  22. 1 point
  23. 1 point
    It is, and if in my not mistaken Jay came back begging for mercy after it didnt work and Wade went to work with McVay instead
  24. 1 point
    Arthur Morgan might be one of the top 5 best video game characters ever.
  25. 1 point
    This Offseason so far!!!...………………………..
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00