Cumulative effect. Think in terms of the poor schmuck who got enhanced as a habitual over a brisket because they had at least the two prior theft convictions at the felony level.
I think it was the total pattern. Years of it Dion has untenable job He really does amazing considering all of us Professional A Holes he has to balance. Bubba is as leftist as Husker but he had a way to walk the line. Husker could have taken some lessons from Bubba But
FOAD = Fine old Autumn day FOAD = Fan of AD (All Day Adrian Peterson) - You should appreciate that one FOAD = Freak out and dance! I can keep this up all night. It's not our fault if you defaulted to such a nasty interpretation of an innocent acronym.
I hesitate to take issue because I really do appreciate the job Dion does just as you all so. I'd never leave, get angry, or drop my sponsorship over one decision in several years that I disagree with. He has done more than enough over the years to earn the credibility to make these calls. I also don't know what kind of flack he may have privately taken from sponsors. If several of them threatened to drop their sponsorships if SH wasn't purged, it's hard to argue with the move. After all, this project costs money and time, and I totally understand that. I also don't think it's politics. You all are correct that Switzer posts leftist horse crap all the time without punishment or disfavor. (Ok, he does get well-deserved disfavor for the OU stuff, but that's on him.) Frankly, I don't even know what Dion's politics are. I suspect he has libertarian leanings, but he has never come across as a partisan either way. Having said that, the problem I have with the cumulative effect or pattern logic is that it doesn't set a clear standard. SH got the Pete Rose treatment for something that none of us can specifically point to and say, "this is the post that got him purged." I went back and read the exchange Garmel referenced, and frankly he said the kinds of things he and others (myself included) have said in the past without punishment.
If you're not sponsoring you can't get away with anything. If Husker was still a sponsor he would have only been verbally reprimanded. I personally don't care for that double standard myself but it's Dion's site.
Nah. But perhaps you should go back and do the breakdown of the word "ASSUME" since you engage in a lot of that activity... As I recall, YOU are the one who had to apologize on something that was so patently offensive that it was reported before I had even seen it.
Warnings are not made public. I suspect there is a tally sheet somewhere. And we know there is some deference to sponsorship, but that isn't a get-out-of-jail-free pass. A ban doesn't just come out of nowhere though...which is why I mentioned the cumulative effect, just as we see in sentencing with enhancement paragraphs in criminal courts. Patterns of conduct are also going to be in play on message boards. I don't envy a site owner of ANY site because there is tons of crap to deal with, far beyond the quibbling amongst the users. Software updates, software crashes, spam, server issues...the list goes on. And at some point, someone may also simply have the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time when they say something that rubs a power that be the wrong way...
In SH's honor, here is more blatant grooming that people who want to have sex with kids are guilty of.
Remember is the Leftists who want to have sex with your kids. They desensitize them with stuff like this.
Never been so glad my kids are grown but never been more worried about my youngest grandkids. Glad to see Texas is beginning to do something in some locales.
I think a lot here would share her assertions prior to the war. And they still may do so in private. However, society has labeled Russia the pariah that they are now so it will be more difficult.
I love those kind of videos. You can get stupid answers from so many people (and edit out the not funny right answers). Like on a college campus - Host: "In which war did the United States fight to gain its independence?" Junior probably at OU: "World War One."
Ridiculous comments. However, for 8 years I heard George Bush called a Nazi countless times - not by some random wingnut off the street but by Democratic political leaders.
In honor of Tennessee removing age limits on marriage here's a Tennessee Congressman, his wife, and their two kids. They married in 2011. They met when she was in high school FFA. And the left are the groomers....
You're falling for another hoax. It's as if you never learn. "WTVC reached out to Leatherwood Tuesday and he gave the following statement: "This bill changes nothing in current law regarding marriage and does not allow minors to get married. It establishes another pathway to marriage in TN law that addresses the conscientious objections, based on deeply held religious convictions, that a number of pastors and individuals have with the current law and certificate. This bill would produce a marriage certificate that would reflect marriage as being between one man and one woman. This certificate would be filed with the county clerk."
Seems creepy to you? She was 19 when they married. Which is legal You can marry in Oklahoma at age 16. Is that creepy to you too? He is 27 yrs older David Foster is 37 yrs older than his wife Brigitte Macron is 24 yrs older Alec Baldwin is 26 yrs older etc etc etc
At least he made an honest woman of her. They created the thing the Leftist groomers don't want, marriages with children teaching morality. Now I can't speak to what came before the marriage but I suppose Bubba doesn't know either.
Coach, First, Tennessee hasn't passed the bill. Second, the bill's intent has nothing to do with getting rid of age requirements. In fact, it doesn't even mention them. The fact that it might arguably get rid of them for common law marriage almost surely is more because of crappy draftsmanship and will almost surely be corrected before the bill would pass. (The bill is dumb, but it's not what these leftist idiots say it is.) Third, from what I can see, Rose's wife is 33. There's definitely a big age difference (about 25 years), but she wasn't a child or even close to one when they married. Looks more like a young adult woman marrying a rich guy for the obvious reasons and the rich guy going along also for the obvious reasons. I don't condone it, but it's not even in the same ballpark. Finally, adults sexualizing and robbing the innocence of children who are 5-8 years old and a captive audience arranged at the expense of taxpayers is 100 times worse than an older guy getting with a younger but adult woman.
How is this kind of rhetoric not labeled as traitorous? And, sadly, if she wins her primary, she will be in Congress again.
Absolutely nothing in the article is even remotely close to 'traitorous.' It really WOULD help if you had someone read the article to you instead of relying on sound bite equivalents from tweets with an agenda... Once you DO read the article, you will see that she opposes service under the schiffshow that is the Biden regime's foreign policy and she ALSO (as do many of us) oppose any manner of vaccine mandate that requires one to get the three brazillion boosters for the clot shot that seems to simply be a magnet FOR the 'rona. You would ALSO learn that bullet points three and four are nowhere to be found in the article.
You're not wrong. The waters are a little muddier as it seems they met when she was still in high school and married before she graduated college. She also looks very young for her age. He does not. It just seems as if some grooming may have been going on. That seems to be the word of the month. I mean who doesn't know a softball/football coach who had previously coached/taught his wife. I assume it's not just Oklahoma and Tennessee, right?
I read it. The context you provided is there but it's un-American. The other bullets are well established. She said those things. She's almost as moronic as Hawley who voted against sending Ukraine aid and then criticized how fast/slow it was getting there.
