American Swindle

This is pretty much it right here. Having coached my own son in 4th grade tackle football, I was constantly reminding my kids it wasn't about going for the big hit, but more about fitting and driving and sustaining a block. The only argument you can make for hits like these is to scare the shit out of the opponent, which is a strategy I suppose, but one that ain't for me.....leave that to the Urban Meyer wannabes of the world. Especially reviewing film against Dripping Springs...they had a big ole' white dude that instead of flowing to the ball as a DT, he just wanted to knock the shit out of my 2nd grade snapper. Ball would be literally going the opposite of him and he wouldn't bat an eye to make the tackle on the ball carrier he just wanted to jack my little dudes up... Anyway, Tackle Football is risky, but last I checked Life is risky. I held out of enrolling my son in tackle until the last day because he was nagging me like crazy to play. Through our first 2 years, we've had 2 mild concussions amongst our ENTIRE TEAM. Both in practice from after the whistle BS. I'll never forget the waiver we had to sign pretty much saying YOU CAN DIE FROM PLAYING but we both signed and moved forward with it. All of the concerns raised are legitimate, but nothing is more irritating than condescending parents commenting that they are better parents because they do not allow their kids to play tackle football. I can respect parents that decide to do it, but don't act like you're better than the parents that put their kids in tackle football. The Seahawks Tackling video all coaches are supposed to watch for certification is pretty legit. Teaches Shoulder Tackling like in Rugby. I took pride in teach this style of tackling to my kids, which makes me better than all of you bitch ass wannabe tackle coaches on the board haha:

They need more competition, we can't even import drugs that are approved in the UK to compete with Big Pharma...

Is this a tactic they call "whataboutism"?

At the end the Corononer mentions the calls for her not to testify being "conflict of interest, 36$million dollars" and it's pretty telling the State wanted it covered up that she was railroaded and not allowed access to the body or bones. This is an egregious case of the State acting with impunity to protect themselves (and as you mentioned the money.)

"Didn't have money back in the day, we wanted Nikes, Mom bought Pscyches!" Tried to get them adidas, but got dem abibas haha

Ran into DJ not too long ago myself...

Sorry, I may be out of the loop on an inside Surly joke thing, but isn't it "For all intents and purposes"?

The fact all countries have to buy SA oil in US dollars is lost on many in the US. How else can country have a 21 Trillion dollar deficit and an exorbitant, inefficient government? OPEC.

Bob Marley and The Wailers Greatest Hits Gold Version The War on Drugs: A Deeper Understanding Ratatat: LP4 Arcade Fire: The Suburbs Opeth: Ghost Reveries

these three were in my cd collection in 7th grade

If you want the Old version of North Loop, all you have to do is watch Orange is the New Black....he's the Sam Healy Officer. Hahah

It's nice to see that some on the left are actually coming out and supporting private business owner's rights though amirite?

Maybe because he's for peace and diplomacy and it's consistent with his non-interventionist stance he's always had?

The collectivism exhibited by both teams these days is mind bottling. Can't support an R supporting what I think is right nor can an R support a D where they agree....Sad!

Everything you are posting Anastasia further confirms Rand has no principles and is a conman weasel. Please post that fake news else where! Sad!

Can dems like this?

I be for State's Rights up in dis mug.. It really allows other states to see if it works or what the unintended consequences are for other states..On a smaller scale, for example, Seattle's minimum wage laws gave us all perspective of the real world consequences of such policies. Regulating the information from the internet is a slippery slope though, it will take more government and busy bodies on the taxpayer dime to regulate. Who will regulate them to make sure they aren't silencing voices that they just do not like?

"This Mainstream Media Narrative Pushing Turd Sandwich is better than the other Mainstream Media Narrative Pushing Turd Sandwich!"

I see hella Beto Signs, but no Cruz Signs....where are all the Cruz supporters? Why aren't they so outspoken for their guy like those that support Beto?

It would almost appear Trump is not for Free Trade, but for protecting the US Auto Manufacturing Industry. Totally opposite of what he did scrapping the TPP (which was a good move imo.)

This is a good thing, the cronyism of Trump and that equity firm remind me of the cronyism that lead to the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937. Using government to protect corporate interests is bullshit.

While you're right to assume I meant you were unhinged, you're wrong to assume that I support for whatever Trump does. It's okay, I forgive you.

You seem hinged. I've criticized Trump on this Trade War with China already so I don't get the vitriol. This only highlights my point that guys like you on the web that talk shit like this only motivate the other side to spite you (or what they see as the cultish Left). Trump sucks balls in a lot of ways my man, so go take your prozac and have a coke and a smile.

I know it's not an outreach for Trump supporters, but the online world does manifest itself in the real world in my opinion. If both sides are constantly talking shit to each other and not focusing on the substance of each issue, then we are just going to keep going round and round on the Team-Party-Tribe-Politics Tilt-A Whirl getting fed turd sandwiches time and time again. It Is what it is. Everyone's a badass online I guess.

I agree with most of this, but if you are on the right side of the argument, then trying to persuade the other side by berating them with what seems like condescending vitriol is not the way to go about it in my opinion. So what I see is this: Person Touching the stove: "Ooh Hot!" Person A's Response: "you dumb ass mawfucker, didn't you know it was hot? Maybe you're dumbass will think next time!" Inner Monologue: (That'll teach that dumbfuck) Person B's Response: "it'll burn you, and it should be avoided in the future" Now which response do you think will get the person touching the hot stove to actually not touch the stove next go round? IMO, there are many out there that would touch it again to spite Person A.