• Blog Entries

    • By Destino in ES Coverage
         1
      We’re still doing this?  Absolutely!  Despite all the compelling reasons to just let everyone go home and enjoy and extended offseason, this is not an option.  The games must be played, and therefore we the long-suffering fans will feel compelled to watch.  Even games no reasonable football fan would choose to watch like, for example, today’s Redskins Jets game.   

      Today’s convergence of sadness features the 30th ranked scoring offense (Jets 14.4 ppg) versus the 32nd (Redskins 12.0 ppg).  The first team to 15 wins!  With no playoff aspirations the compelling story lines for this game are largely limited to watching young players (hopefully) develop.  Dwayne Haskins gets his first home start and Derrius Guice is back from injury.   
       
      My, reasonable, goals for today’s game:  
      1- Score a touchdown 
      2- Score more than 17 points.   
      3- Haskins throws for 200 yards or more with no interceptions  
      4- Guice runs the ball at least 10 times and finishes at 3.5 yards per carry and healthy.  
       
      Hoping for a win at this point feels like setting myself up for disappointment, so I’m happy to settle for an entertaining loss.  
       
      Special thanks to @pez for some excellent Guinness beef stew.  If you absolutely have to stand in a frozen parking lot at 9am, the best place to do it is at the Extremeskins Tailgate with Pez and @Huly.  Great fans, great people. 
       
      The Redskins have declared for the following players as inactive: 
      Paul Richardson  
      Colt McCoy 
      Deshazor Everett 
      Chris Thompson  
      Ross Pierschbacher 
      Vernon Davis  
      Tim Settle  
       
      The Jets declared the following players as inactive  
      Nate Hairston  
      Darryl Roberts  
      Paul Worrilow 
      Matthias Farley  
      CJ Mosley  
      Jordan Willis  
      Leo Koloamatangi 
       
      1st Quarter - Redskins 0 - 6 Jets
      If you wanted to sit in the cold and watch a football game with some Jets fans at FedEx, but were worried that there were not enough seats available, I have good news.  There’s plenty of space available, so come on down and prove you’re a real fan by sitting though this in person.
       
      Jets dominated the 1st quarter even though they only scored 6 points.  The reason being that Washington managed only 13 yards of offense and a single first down.  
       
      Question: Is it still a check down pass if the QB never looks at anyone else?
       
      2nd Quarter - Redskins 3 - 20 Jets
      The Jets have achieved an insurmountable 13 point lead early in the 2nd quarter.  All hope is lost.

      Is there a more perfect example of the Redskins offense than their first scoring drive in the 2nd quarter?  Interception gives the Redskins the ball on the Jets 16 yard line.  They proceed to march 10 yards backwards before kicking a field goal from the Jets 26.  It's perfect.  Two or three more field goals we can call it a day. 

      The Jets score again and if feels like they are are just piling on at this point.  Three touchdowns in the first half for them, just three points for the redskins.  Our streak of no touchdowns has now extended to 15 quarters. 
       
      3rd Quarter - Redskins 3 - 20 Jets
      There is a spider slowly descending from the ceiling in the press box and it's the most interesting thing that's happened during the third quarter of this game. 
       
      I have decided to allow the spider to live, provided it does not touch me.  I'm off to get some more caffeine. 

      4th Quarter - Redskins 17 - 34 Jets
      The first wave of Redskins fans, the few that are here, started streaming towards the exits after that 4th Jets touchdown.  As if the Jets didn't have this game wrapped up in the 2nd quarter. 
       
      Jet have now more than doubled their average points per game and have matched their season high of 34 points (and they missed two field goals in this game). 
       
      TOUCHDOWN REDSKINS!  THE DROUGHT IT OVER!  Guice took a short pass from Haskins  all the way to the house.  2 point conversion is successful on a pass from Haskins to Quinn. 
       
      The Redskins score another touchdown!  This feels like an embarrassment of riches, even if we are still certain to lose this game. 
       
      End of Game.
       
      Let's review those reasonable goals I mentioned earlier:
       
      1- Success.
      2- Close enough, I'm counting it
      3- Haskins did throw for over 200, but unfortunately did have an interception. 
      4- Guice was not given the opportunity to run the ball ten times today.  He did however score on a 45 yard TD pass and finish the game healthy.  I'll take it.
       
      Even though the Redskins lost, it was good to see the offense show some faint signs of life and end the streak of games without a TD.  The team looked competitive for much of the second half, and perhaps they could have made this a fun game if they carried that same energy throughout.  It was good to see Guice and Mclaurin show out today.  I think both of them have a future with this team that I look forward to seeing. 

       
       

       
       
       
       
       
Sign in to follow this  
Larry

CNN: Supreme Court strikes down Texas abortion access law

Recommended Posts

Female Spousal Unit:  Talk dirty to me.

 

Male Spousal Unit:  I am fully capable to repeatedly deliver my seed for the mutually acknowledged benefit of our chosen political movement.

 

Female Spousal Unit:  *cue waterworks*

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

Female Spousal Unit:  Talk dirty to me.

 

Male Spousal Unit:  I am fully capable to repeatedly deliver my seed for the mutually acknowledged benefit of our chosen political movement.

 

Female Spousal Unit:  *cue waterworks*

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tshile said:

 

Its things like this that reinforce to me that most people are stupid

 

occasionally I start to wonder if I’m just a jerk that’s overly pessimistic and have serious concerns about that, then I read stuff like this and it’s a huge relief. I’m right. There are just a lot of dumb people running around. 

 

Here is what I say on that subject (when i'm in a grumpy old guy mode - which as per my wife is pretty much all the time).

 

Think about the average person. Think how uniformed, narrow minded, poorly read, unmotivated and just dumb that person is. Well half the population is worse than that.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

Here is what I say on that subject (when i'm in a grumpy old guy mode - which as per my wife is pretty much all the time).

 

Think about the average person. Think how uniformed, narrow minded, poorly read, unmotivated and just dumb that person is. Well half the population is worse than that.

 

George Carlin beat you to it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Larry said:

 

George Carlin beat you to it.  

 

Did he! I'm in good company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Subtle.  

 

And an argument which I really don't like.  (Although I don't think it's 100% invalid.)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MartinC said:

 

Here is what I say on that subject (when i'm in a grumpy old guy mode - which as per my wife is pretty much all the time).

 

Think about the average person. Think how uniformed, narrow minded, poorly read, unmotivated and just dumb that person is. Well half the population is worse than that.

I think of those kids in English class, both late high school and early college, that when asked to read out loud struggled to do so.  Struggled with the only language they've ever known in their lives.  i imagine millions of them.  Each repeating, in their halting manner, bumper sticker slogans on complicated political issues.

 

Behold the electorate. 

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, MartinC said:

Think about the average person.

I’m thinking of @LD0506

 

 

4 hours ago, MartinC said:

Think how uniformed, narrow minded, poorly read, unmotivated and just dumb that person is.

How long have you hated LD0506?

Edited by Sacks 'n' Stuff
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Destino said:

I think of those kids in English class, both late high school and early college, that when asked to read out loud struggled to do so.  Struggled with the only language they've ever known in their lives.  i imagine millions of them.  Each repeating, in their halting manner, bumper sticker slogans on complicated political issues.

 

Behold the electorate. 

 

 

Liberal elitist.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Liberal elitist.  

 

When did being elite become a bad thing?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

I’m thinking of @LD0506

 

 

How long have you hated LD0506?

 

There are a few posters on the board who aspire to average - @LD0506 is above that 🙂

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

When did being elite become a bad thing?

 

When the non-elite people were convinced the elite people were the cause of their problems 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MartinC said:

 

When did being elite become a bad thing?

 

When it was discovered that it helped the Republican Party. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Destino said:

I think of those kids in English class, both late high school and early college, that when asked to read out loud struggled to do so.  Struggled with the only language they've ever known in their lives.  i imagine millions of them.  Each repeating, in their halting manner, bumper sticker slogans on complicated political issues.

 

Behold the electorate. 

 

If you see the world the same way at 50 that you did at 20, you wasted 30 years of your life.  I don't live in an area dominated by that at all, its starting to feel like a divide between urban and rural areas with rural states failing terribly at education.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
 
 
 
This writer raises some interesting questions about the unintended consequences of states redefining the concept of personhood with these abortion bans...
 
 Carliss Chatman
Carliss Chatman, an assistant professor at Washington and Lee University School of Law, studies corporate personhood, corporate governance and ethics, among other legal topics.

 

We ought to take our laws seriously. Under the laws, people have all sorts of rights and protections. When a state grants full personhood to a fetus, should they not apply equally?

 

For example, should child support start at conception? Every state permits the custodial parent — who has primary physical custody of the child and is primarily responsible for his or her day-to-day care — to receive child support from the noncustodial parent. Since a fetus resides in its mother, and receives all nutrition and care from its mother’s body, the mother should be eligible for child support as soon as the fetus is declared a person — at conception in Alabama, at six weeks in states that declare personhood at a fetal heartbeat, at eight weeks in Missouri, which was on the way to passing its law on Friday, but at birth in states that have not banned abortion.

 

And what about deportation? Can a pregnant immigrant who conceived her child in the United States be expelled? Because doing so would require deporting a U.S. citizen. To determine the citizenship of a fetal person requires examination of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, which declares, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The word “born” was not defined by the drafters. Presumably, they intended the standard dictionary definition: brought forth by birth. Our dates of birth are traditionally when our lives begin; we do not celebrate our dates of conception or the date of our sixth week in utero. But in states with abortion bans, “born” takes on new meaning. Now legislatures assign an arbitrary time during gestation to indicate when life, personhood and, presumably, the rights that accompany these statuses take hold. This grant of natural personhood at a point before birth brings application of the 14th Amendment into question and may thus give a fetus citizenship rights — but only in those states.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/if-a-fetus-is-a-person-it-should-get-child-support-due-process-and-citizenship/2019/05/17/7280ae30-78ac-11e9-b3f5-5673edf2d127_story.html?utm_term=.1fc4426b6784

 

 

Edited by Dan T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll wade in to some of these.  

 

7 hours ago, Dan T. said:

For example, should child support start at conception?

 

I think I'd support that.  Pregnancy, prenatal care, and childbirth, certainly involve costs  I think I would actually support compelling Dad-to-be to chip in for those costs.  

 

7 hours ago, Dan T. said:

And what about deportation? Can a pregnant immigrant who conceived her child in the United States be expelled? Because doing so would require deporting a U.S. citizen.

 

Might want to think before introducing that argument into court.  I could easily see the "OMG! We're under attack from demon anchor babies!" crowd deciding that anchor babies aren't citizens unless the parents can prove that the egg was fertilized in the US.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Larry said:

Subtle.  

 

And an argument which I really don't like.  (Although I don't think it's 100% invalid.)  

Ha

 

It is to laugh

 

Subtlety is not and never has been my forte, not is it aspirational. For reasons that don't belong here, any chance for subtlety was burned off of me long ago, and TBH I can't say I miss it. All those charming attributes like subtlety and diplomacy and the rest are little more than excuses to avoid uncomfortable truth.

 

The uncomfortable truth here is that women WILL be forced back to the days of coathangers. If it doesn't literally come to that it will be more because wire coathangers are an anachronism more than them having better options. Talibama has actually floated a Fugitive Slave Law to pursue and punish women who leave the state, a goddam coathanger meme is the problem here?

 

Again, it is to laugh

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention all the wonderful new laws that will control how a female behaves while pregnant, including what she eats, drugs she takes (legal or illegal), what activities, and so on. 

 

If you don't think that these laws aren't about control of females, you're kidding yourself. It's hiding behind religion to seem legitimate, when it's old fashioned patriarchy.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I find myself agreeing  with a lot of what you say LSF, I still think your focus is too narrow. This isn't just about women or gender(although that is a huge theme within it), this is about power and control PERIOD! Women, gays, blacks, immigrants, multi-racial children in commercials, artists, comedians, intellectuals, loudmouths, boatrockers, snarky T shirt wearers, yadda yadda yadda, absolutely anyone that disagrees or even doesn't support their disease enough can fall into their crosshairs. Zyklon B does not discriminate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was half listening to a Republican congressman on Meet the Press discussing the new wave of abortion laws.  And I caught something that I think He mentioned that new technology was allowing parents to screen their children for genetic disorders, and he "didn't want our country to be performing these barbaric third world practices."  

 

Might be worth discussing.  Should a woman be allowed to decide to abort a pregnancy if, say, it's determined that the fetus has Down's?  (That's the only genetic condition that I know might be screened, but I assume there's others.)  

 

(Or to pick a different case, I remember reading recently that I think it was India has made it illegal for doctors to tell parents the gender of their fetus, because so many were choosing to abort females.  Is your opinion of screening for Down's and gender different?)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.