-
Posts
14963 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by Bevo
-
Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This
Bevo replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
I like Brandon Baker as a player so you must be confused or missed a word like early playing time. -
assistance with wrtiting ones own obituary ...
Bevo replied to OWLVIS's topic in Can You Help Me With This?
In Loving Memory of Gregory "Greg" H. Reynolds October 14, 1982 - January 22, 2025 With heavy hearts, we announce the passing of Gregory "Greg" H. Reynolds, a man who lived life with depth, charisma, and a quiet sense of adventure. Greg passed away on January 22, 2025, leaving behind a legacy of love, laughter, and an unmistakable presence. Standing at an impressive 6’4”, Greg’s height was only overshadowed by his larger-than-life personality. Tall, dark, and undeniably handsome, Greg had a way of making every room he entered feel just a little brighter. His striking good looks were matched only by his warmth, intelligence, and dry sense of humor that drew people to him effortlessly. A man of varied passions, Greg’s love for literature was evident to anyone who spent more than a few moments with him. His book collection spanned genres, but there was a special place in his heart for the raw, no-nonsense style of Surly, whose words resonated deeply with Greg’s own love for authenticity and introspection. He could often be found lost in the pages of a Surly thread, his thoughtful gaze reflecting the complexity of the worlds within those words. He believed that literature, like life, should challenge you, make you think, and at times, make you a little uncomfortable. Greg was a lover of the simple things—quiet mornings with a cup of coffee, spontaneous road trips, and the feeling of getting lost in a good book. Yet, for all his introspection, he was deeply devoted to his friends and family, always offering a listening ear, a thoughtful piece of advice, or just the right words when you needed them most. He leaves behind his beloved sister, Charlotte Reynolds; his parents, Thomas and Evelyn Reynolds; a host of friends who considered him a brother; and countless others who were lucky enough to know the incredible person he was. In honor of Greg’s love for Surly, we invite friends and family to gather at his favorite tailgate for the Spring game for a memorial in celebration of his life. Share a story, and raise a glass to the man who lived with quiet strength and a passion for life that will never be forgotten. Rest easy, Greg. You’ve left a mark on this world that no amount of time will erase. -
Southern CA Fires- Extreme Santa Ana Winds
Bevo replied to Wilcox Cummingtonite's topic in Daily Texan
I was going to post something similar, but wasn't sure how it would go over. 100 year old homes on small lots is a recipe for disaster in fire prone regions. ICF, steel construction, or even polyurethane SIPs with fiber cement board siding and non-wood shingles would perform better. -
Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This
Bevo replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
That guy's film is quite impressive. Don't know what his ranking is but he is a must have. -
Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This
Bevo replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
All I'm talking about is feet. He is a bit like a baby giraffe and would have problems with both speed rushers like Ford and bull rushers like Berymon. Sam Utu is rated 74 in the country and use as a comparison. Felix Ojo is rated #29 in the country so I guess he is too highly regarded to compare. Ojo has better feet than Wright but not great feet and he leans too far forward, doesn't keep his feet under him and loses balance. -
Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This
Bevo replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
Yeah, I know the offers. Krempin looks good and of course Turntine looks great. Those other guys are Jags. And Wright has terrible feet. Look as the tape of Wirght and then look at Sam Utu who 247 lists as an interior lineman or Immanuel Iheanacho who is the number 2 rated OT - https://www.hudl.com/profile/19956945/Immanuel-Iheanacho -
Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This
Bevo replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
That would be a bad offensive line class. Max Wright is terrible and that interior class is meh. -
TLDR. Can you summarize in a gif or something’?
-
Transfer Cycle 2024-2025 - Handjob Helobious Is the Man!
Bevo replied to closetojumping's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
We ain’t signing a guy named Rocco - Rutgers lock -
Transfer Cycle 2024-2025 - Handjob Helobious Is the Man!
Bevo replied to closetojumping's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
tOSU also has a nursing school.- 8417 replies
-
- 12
-
-
Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This
Bevo replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
Dude looks like he will be a good player for us. -
Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This
Bevo replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
Tristan -
Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This
Bevo replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
His film looks very good. He has excellent feet and is able to pick up guys in space. He has good size. He finishes his blocks. There is a lot to like. -
Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This
Bevo replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
Correct. I am friends with a number of older black women from Gonzales (not Goliad) and generally they know the families from Halletsville, Shiner, all the way down to Refugio. I know that is a huge swath of land (1.5hr drive) but the populations are pretty low unless you include Victoria. The connection is church, and lots of related families. -
Jake Tapper on CNN was not thrilled. https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/20/politics/video/biden-preemptive-pardons-tapper-bash-digvid
-
Southern CA Fires- Extreme Santa Ana Winds
Bevo replied to Wilcox Cummingtonite's topic in Daily Texan
Pretty cool. I had a $1400 bill from Air BnB and $50 cleaning fee and $200 Air BnB fee plus taxes in a no sales tax state brought the total to $1800. -
Transfer Cycle 2024-2025 - Handjob Helobious Is the Man!
Bevo replied to closetojumping's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
Well, tOSU fans are crazy. I was at the Denver airport at a sports bar, and a fan was screaming for him to be fired for losing to Michigan after they had just blown out Oregon. -
Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This
Bevo replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
I still think that his best position is linebacker in the Overshown mold, but I doubt he will embrace the move and gain the necessary weight. More likely, in the current North Shore mold, he will transfer from his first school and fizzle out. -
Personally, I'm not a fan of ranges. I prefer cooktops and double ovens. Some of the professional ranges look nice, but performance is better with a cooktop and set of ovens. You can get a 36 inch cooktop with induction, gas, or induction and gas (I think Fisher and Paykel). Then you can get a regular oven with a speed oven which doubles as a microwave. A lot of it, in the end, depends on the layout of the kitchen and the look you are going for. However, function wise, I think a cooktop and 2 ovens always wins out over 30 and 36 and 48 inch ranges. And yes, 30" ranges look puny and cheap in luxury kitchens.
-
So you are saying using the Sedition act against your political enemies isn't the same as threatening to put a political enemy in jail? And, I guess this is different because Trump is guilty? Kamala Harris Says DOJ Would Prosecute Trump If She’s Elected https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/06/kamala-harris-prosecuting-donald-trump?srsltid=AfmBOooxmIKVj-Z15s048sXtCQb7LBdmPL67e2VLq-sdr0qgIdfErSZa While Democrats in Congress are at loggerheads over whether to begin impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump, Democrats on the campaign trail have been less constrained in their opinion that the president has committed crimes—and should be charged as soon as he is out of office. Jumping on the Lock Him Up bandwagon is California senator Kamala Harris, who told the NPR Politics Podcast in an interview that aired Wednesday that the Department of Justice would have “no choice” but to prosecute Trump once he is no longer president. What about the political opponents who threatened to criminally prosecute Harry S. Truman for war crimes for his use of the atomic bomb in Japan. And Oppenheimer wasn't criminally charged but he was threatened with criminal charges. How is that different? And who the fuck cares about this point - It doesn't change the fact that pardoning Fausi sets a dangerous precedent. Why do you think it doesn't? Because Trump sucks as a person? I don't get your reasoning. https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/gore-lays-out-a-compelling-indictment-of-bush-actions/ But even after discounting for political motivations, it seems to me that Gore has done a service by laying out the case as clearly and copiously as he has done. His overall charge is that Bush has systematically broken the laws and bent the Constitution by his actions in the national security and domestic anti-terrorism areas. He is not the first to make that complaint. My e-mail has included many messages from people who have leaped far ahead of the evidence and concluded that Bush should be impeached and removed from office for actions they deem to be illegal. Gore stops well short of that point and contents himself with citing the cases that cause many others concern. The first – and, to my mind, weakest – instance is the claim that Bush took the nation to war on the basis of false intelligence about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. But there is no clear evidence as yet that Bush willfully concocted or knowingly distorted the intelligence he received about Saddam Hussein’s military programs. Interpretations of that intelligence varied within the government, but the Clinton administration, of which Gore was an important part, came to the same conclusions that Bush did – and so did other governments in the Western alliance. It is a reach to attempt to make a crime of a policy misjudgment. But the other cases cited by Gore are more troubling. The Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, for which only low-level military personnel have been punished, traces back through higher and untouched levels of command to the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the White House, all of which failed in their duties to assure that the occupation forces were adhering to recognized international standards for the treatment of prisoners. Similarly, the administration’s resistance to setting and enforcing clear prohibitions on torture and inhumane treatment of detainees in the war on terrorism raises legitimate questions about its willingness to adhere to the rule of law. From the first days after 9/11, Bush has appeared to believe that he is essentially unconstrained. His oddly equivocal recent signing statement on John McCain’s legislation banning such tactics seemed to say he could ignore the plain terms of the law. If Judge Samuel Alito is right that “no one is above the law,” then Bush’s supposition deserves to be challenged. Gore’s final example – on which he has lots of company among legal scholars – is the contention that Bush broke the law in ordering the National Security Agency to monitor domestic phone calls without a warrant from the court Congress had created to supervise all such wiretapping. If – as the Justice Department and the White House insist – the president can flout that law, then it is hard to imagine what power he cannot assert. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter has summoned Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to a hearing on the warrantless wiretap issue, and that hearing should be the occasion for a broad exploration of the willingness of this administration to be constrained by the Constitution and the laws. The committee should keep the attorney general on the witness stand as long as it takes – as long as it spent examining the qualifications of Judge Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts, if it comes to that. The stakes for the country are that important.
-
Well, 20 people all of the same political persuasion are arguing with me because I said that the preemptive pardoning of Fausi set a dangerous precedent that others will follow in the future. They won't bet me that Trump will use a preemptive pardon within 4 years and they won't admit that it is a problem. And if you go back a page, you can see who made the original post regarding the Fausi pardon that I responded to.
-
You seem to be saying that John Adams didn't go after his political enemies with criminal charges? President John Adams oversees passage of first of Alien and Sedition Acts 1798 President John Adams oversees passage of first of Alien and Sedition Acts President John Adams oversees the passage of the Naturalization Act, the first of four pieces of controversial legislation known together as the Alien and Sedition Acts, on June 18, 1798. Strong political opposition to these acts succeeded in undermining the Adams administration, helping Thomas Jefferson to win the presidency in 1800. At the time, America was threatened by war with France, and Congress was attempting to pass laws that would give more authority to the federal government, and the president in particular, to deal with suspicious persons, especially foreign nationals. The Naturalization Act raised the requirements for aliens to apply for U.S. citizenship, requiring that immigrants reside in the U.S. for 14 years before becoming eligible. The earlier law had required only five years of residence before an application could be made. Adams, in fact, never enforced the Naturalization Act. Nevertheless, he came under heavy fire from opponents, led by Vice President Thomas Jefferson, who felt that the Naturalization Act and its companion legislation was unconstitutional and smacked of despotism. So disgusted was Jefferson with Adams’ enthusiastic support of the law that he could no longer support the president and left Washington during the Congressional vote. Former President George Washington, on the other hand, supported the legislation. Adams signed the second piece of the legislation, the Alien Act, on June 25. This act gave the president the authority to deport aliens during peacetime. The Alien Enemies Act, which Adams signed on July 6, gave him the power to deport any alien living in the U.S. with ties to U.S. wartime enemies. Finally, the Sedition Act, passed on July 14, gave Adams tremendous power to define treasonable activity including any false, scandalous and malicious writing. The intended targets of the Sedition Act were newspaper, pamphlet and broadside publishers who printed what he considered to be libelous articles aimed primarily at his administration. Abigail Adams urged her husband to pass the Sedition Act, calling his opponents criminal and vile. Of the four acts, the Sedition Act was the most distressing to staunch First Amendment advocates. They objected to the fact that treasonable activity was vaguely defined, was defined at the discretion of the president and would be punished by heavy fines and imprisonment. The arrest and imprisonment of 25 men for supposedly violating the Sedition Act ignited an enormous outcry against the legislation. Among those arrested was Benjamin Franklin’s grandson, Benjamin Franklin Bache, who was the editor of the Republican-leaning Philadelphia Democrat-Republican Aurora. Citing Adams’ abuse of presidential powers and threats to free speech, Jefferson’s party took control of Congress and the presidency in 1800. Eugene Debs was also prosecuted for sedition because he was a political enemy. Besides those two were there any others criminally prosecuted for being political enemies?
-
Well precedent means an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances. So, literally, the first preemptive pardon set a precedent for the next. However, if many years go by as in Nixon to Biden, Biden would have been using a legal precedent but it is unclear whether the actual facts behind Nixon's pardon influenced his decision. With that said, I am supremely confident that this will become a regular event, most likely continuing within 4 years. There was a big difference as @Gatorubet mentioned, between the preemptive pardon to heal the nation following the Vietnam War and a man that probably 35% of America couldn't properly identify.
-
I do prefer quoting left leaning articles as it eliminates some of the ad hominem. But in case you were wondering about the opinion of the preemptive Ford pardon of Nixon: https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-nixon-pardon-in-retrospect The Nixon pardon in constitutional retrospect September 8, 2024 | by NCC Staff President Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon on this day in 1974 generated a national controversy, but in recent years, some of the pardon’s biggest critics have changed their tunes on the unprecedented move. Watergate reporters Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward had vehemently opposed the pardon after Ford went on national television on September 8, 1974, to announce it. But in recent years, the former Washington Post journalists have approved of Ford’s move to absolve Nixon of any criminal charges related to the Watergate break-in and its cover-up. In a July 2014 panel hosted by the Post, Woodward called the pardon “an act of courage.” He had talked with Ford decades after the pardon and said the former President made a “very compelling argument” for his actions based on national security and economic needs. The late Senator Ted Kennedy said in 2001 that while he initially opposed the pardon, he had come to accept it as the best move for the country. And Richard Ben-Veniste, a former Watergate prosecutor and a Democrat, wrote about the pardon shortly after Ford’s passing in 2006. “Did Ford make the right decision in pardoning his predecessor? The answer to that question is more nuanced than either the howls of outrage that greeted the pardon three decades ago or the general acceptance with which it is viewed now,” Ben-Veniste said in a commentary for the Post. “The decision to pardon Nixon was a political judgment properly within the bounds of Ford's constitutional authority,” he argued. “Jerry Ford acted in accord with what he sincerely felt were the best interests of the country; that there was no secret quid pro quo with Nixon for a pardon in return for resignation; and that Ford, a compassionate man, was moved by the palpable suffering of a man who had lost so much.” But in the months after the pardon back in 1974, most Americans didn’t approve of Ford’s move. In a Gallup poll taken 43 years ago, 53 percent of those polled disapproved of the pardon. However, in a 1986 Gallup poll, 54 percent of Americans said they now approved of the presidential pardon. Ford appeared in front of a House judiciary committee in October 1974 to explain the pardon. “I was absolutely convinced then as I am now that if we had had [an] indictment, a trial, a conviction, and anything else that transpired after this that the attention of the President, the Congress and the American people would have been diverted from the problems that we have to solve. And that was the principle reason for my granting of the pardon,” he told Representative Elizabeth Holtzman. At a 2014 panel discussion, Ford’s lawyer during that period, Benton Becker, explained an additional element that influenced Ford’s decision to issue a presidential pardon: a 1915 Supreme Court decision. In Burdick v. United States, the Court ruled that a pardon carried an "imputation of guilt" and accepting a pardon was "an admission of guilt.”. Thus, this decision implied that Nixon accepted his guilt in the Watergate controversy by also accepting Ford’s pardon. Prior to Ford’s issuance of the pardon, Becker was tasked with the difficult job of mediating the negotiations between Ford and Nixon. Becker said he took copies of the Burdick decision to California when he met with former President Nixon, and under Ford’s instructions, walked through the decision with Nixon. Becker said the discussion with Nixon was very difficult, and the former President kept trying to change the subject way from Burdick. Finally, Nixon acknowledged Becker’s argument about what the Supreme Court decision meant. After he left the White House, Ford carried part of the Burdick decision with him in his wallet in case someone brought up the pardon. In a later interview with Woodward for Caroline Kennedy’s book, “Profiles in Courage for Our Time,” Ford pulled out the dog-eared decision and read the key parts of it to Woodward.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!