Jump to content

Bozo_Casanova

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    14130
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by Bozo_Casanova

  1. First, I’m not raising boys. My wife and I raised two sharp, capable young women. Second, there’s nothing poor or even middle about me. I’m very successful, affluent, and healthy as a result of fantastic luck compounded by hard work and focus, and lot of help. I don’t fall into the “almost all” category. Our lives are exceptional on almost every level and there’s nothing more irritating to me than people in my shoes poor mouthing or referring to themselves as even middle class. We are not and inshallah we won’t be. That’s exactly my point- most people are dealt a bad hand. At least half (by definition) of them are below average on one or multiple levels - health, height, talent, upbringing, intelligence, appearance, access to opportunities, etc. most of the rest are bunched of in a tight group we thing of as the middle but are really the above-average-but-not-enough-to-matter, and most of the rest don’t catch the happenstance breaks that really matter. The fact that you conflate “impoverished existence” with economic poverty primarily or “poor people” tells me that the rent for shirt with your name on it has never in your life come out of your paycheck, so I’ll try to explain this as succinctly as possible, ahem: EVERYONE HAS IT HARD IN AMERICA. I did not say they had it harder. I said that almost all lead a more “impoverished existence” than safe sex does, and that doesn’t even seem controversial. Good profession, rich inner life, integrity, sense of humor and irony, brains? Are you saying that almost all young white men don’t lack those things?
  2. Summer before I came to UT I dated a 17 year old from Watauga who danced at Wild Orchid and Babydolls, and she was gorgeous. Stunning. I mean, she looked like a blond cross between Ava Gardner and Traci Lords. Unfortunately, she had had a very, very hard adolescence. She was basically a sweet, goofy girl who was processing a lot of trauma with no support, loved animals and really wanted to reconcile with her mom, which she did that summer and when I left for Austin I hoped things would get better for her. Recently I looked her up on Facebook and it seems like her life didn’t turn out very well- substance abuse, violence, troubled relationships, health issues, etc. She’s probably heavier than she was by 75 pounds, missing several teeth and also apparently involved in some pyramid supplement and life coaching type businesses. I hate to say so, but it’s embarrassing stuff. Anyway, this was 1992 but I remember she looked down on Southlake kids.
  3. Including the Mackovic era I can think of plenty of QBs who were more limited, I can only think of two who were as frustrating, and neither got this far towards conference and title contention. I don’t want to mention their names here, because it would just make a bad thread worse and I’m not comparing Ewers to either of them. Ewers has played way, way better than Carson Beck this season.
  4. Sure. Me too. Most of them don’t get this far. We have a lot of dumb posters.
  5. Not above *some,* and not the degree per se. Your profession, the mobility snd options it affords you, and the talent and work it took to enter and succeed in it keeps you above almost *all* of them. It’s really important to remember that.
  6. I think you’re projecting here. I have no idea how good Arch Manning is. Not enough data. I have never once said we should change starters, and I have a long record on these boards of saying that recruiting rankings are an artifact of who is recruiting a given player and don’t mean much beyond that. That said- yes, I am describing the vast majority of college QBs, who also share the common trait of not winning championships. I don’t think we have a better option, and Ewers isn’t bad enough to explore Manning’s downside, but none of that makes Ewers less frustrating.
  7. I understand what you’re saying. It’s certainly true that their identity has been a lever to separate you from your rights, and even though they haven’t gained anything from your loss, your loss is real and more existential than theirs. But (and I’m not defending anybody here) it’s important to keep in mind that the vast majority of straight young white men have worse prospects and a more impoverished existence on almost every level than you do. And unless people like you can find the empathy to separate the pimps from the tricks, you’re going to wind up contributing to your own marginalization, or at best not making it better.
  8. That’s not the issue. Everybody is shaky sometimes, and Ewers is no exception. The issue is that Ewers is usually good, and sometimes shaky, but never great; and almost never good for four full quarters, or even consistently good for whole possessions.
  9. This is a really good post and you are absolutely right, but “if he doesn’t waver” is doing some very heavy lifting at the end. Austin’s biggest issues in no particular order are 1) Texas <25 brain drain 2) Water scarcity 3) affordability and its impact on public sector employees and young families 4) loss of young families in urban core, and negative feedback loop w/r/t public school funding
  10. Has Ewers ever played a full game as sharply against a good defense as Klubnik is playing us? Serious question.
  11. This. Just make them stop the run.
  12. Need to watch it after this series but looks like Blue’s timing was off
  13. Love how Helm fights for the extra couple yards
  14. I can hear the trickling already
  15. Not for nothing, none of those things matter to the deficit. The only things that do are social security, Medicare, Medicaid and the military, along with the interest payments on the debt itself. And the REALLY fun part is that if you just make wholesale, indiscriminate cuts to those things the deficit probably increases a bit because tax revenues decrease. So what we need is a strategic unwinding of the budget deficit and a reallocation of spending that reduces cost but not necessarily spending in a transformative way. and now step back to the real world, look at that task, and realize that your pay scale means that your absolute best-case candidates are John Cornyn and Colin Allred. Or Roger Williams and Julie Oliver. Or Steve Daines and whatever his name was. And your worst case is Lauren Boebert and Tommy Tuberville and Ted Cruz. So far.
  16. They already do. They just finagle their way to it. One of my favorite lessons of history is that officers of the British East India Company were paid very little and expected to come home rich, both by themselves and the company. To fail to get rich was seen as a sign of laziness, stupidity, or worse, naive sympathy towards the natives. Thus the Hindustani word “loot” entered our language. You pay for the employees want.
  17. If anything, we need to elevate their station so we can dump the fucking toadies we allow the powerful to install today without any talented opposition.
  18. We should pay them $1-2M/year and senators should make $3-5mm.
  19. But it’s a bad gig for a 35 year old CPA or 50 year old entrepreneur or family farmer. Successful ones, anyway. Not for nothing, we’d have much better people in congress if we raised their salary to $1mm/year. We get what we pay for.
  20. Me too, but on the other hand watching Trump repeatedly swoop in at the last minute to fuck up Vought’s plans because of something Trump saw on Twitter or someone who came into his office, and seeing their relationship degrade in public until the inevitable firing/disgrace/shunning will be fun.
×
×
  • Create New...