TexLonghorn

That's just The Way We Were in the 80's - it was awesome! Thanks For the Memory!

No, buddy, it's you- you Take My Breath Away!

You can't remember ANY of them? Oh well, Que Sera Sera.

Had to stay up late or sneak off secretly to watch the scary stuff!

Heard that - I guess patience would have served me well! So since we used the safety bag yesterday (with Bama and UT both agreeing to use it), then I'd guess the two options would be that Wisconsin did not want to use it today vs Texas wanting to, or that Texas doesn't care if it's used or not and just defers to the other team to make the call.

What are the rules for the safety bag at first? I know how it works when it's in play, but it was in our game yesterday against Bama, but not there today? Do the teams decide if the bag is used? Or what determines if the bag is there or not? Just weird to me that a Texas home game yesterday used it, but a Texas home game today doesn't.

My mental picture of Finnish people has always been from first minute of this performance:

This "whistleblower" isn't even advocating that transgender care as a whole is wrong - she's indicating that the facility she worked with was actually committing medical malpractice - intentionally misdiagnosing ailments, concealing potential side effects of medication, intentionally using only therapists who will back up a diagnosis even before consultation. That is neither an indictment of transgender care nor evidence that every facility involved in transgender care uses the same tactics (even IF true for the one facility she worked for). As for whose anecdotal evidence carries weight, Fatty, there IS a difference between me or anyone on "my" side accepting anecdotal evidence and you or anyone on "your" side accepting anecdotal evidence. Aside from whether you see what I view as clear red flags in this "whistleblower's" claim, and aside from whether I would take anecdotal evidence from someone who has actually GONE THROUGH gender dysphoria and transgendering over the report of someone who merely worked NEAR the process, there is still a crucial distinction. Those on "my" side are not under any idea that EVERYONE MUST go through gender reassignment, whereas "your" side believes that they have the right to prevent EVERYONE THEY WANT from going through it. Whether you like it or not, that puts us at having different standards of proof. You have to overcome and somehow overrule that this process is between the person, family, and physician, and instead prove why it must be banned entirely by government members who have never gone through the process, and for the most part, grew up before the subject was even discussed/researched/investigated. The ultimate truth of the matter is that it's nice to see what everyone's opinion is here, but until anyone shows me that they have actually done research themselves into the causes, remedies, and effects, of gender dysphoria, it's just talk. I don't really care that someone thinks they can read published studies and try to poke holes in their methodology - Have they conducted their own studies? How long have they been studying in the field? Not a single day? Ok, thanks for the input. And I don't care that some lady somewhere complains about staying on a job she supposedly morally objected to because she wanted financial benefit from it.

Oh, well I didn't know this one person who I've never met or heard of before has an opinion on the issue. I guess that settles the debate now. I mean, look at her... she worked at a place for 4 years. She identifies as queer. And she is telling her story, putting herself at great personal and professional risk - she'll tell you that herself. I'm convinced. Debate over.

And did anyone else notice this last week?: Michael B. Jordan in the opening monologue was basically just wearing the Janet Reno but showing more cleavage and with a more sparkly necklace.

OK, I watched a movie called Rubber, a horror movie that's available on YouTUBE.com from 2010 (which was a good year for movies). It's a smaller-budget movie, and obviously the makers weren't under the pressure of a jacked up, over-inflated budget like a lot of the more tired re-tread horror movies of late, and this allowed them to just spin the wheel and roll with it. It's tough to gauge what anyone's interest in this movie would be - some of the acting can be a little flat, the plot a little wobbly at times - but if you want a horror movie that's as much radial as it is radical, you might give it a try(cycle). Trailer and movie link in the spoiler.

Here we go again!

Uh oh... Beard's about to give her the Aunt Jemima Treatment...

Buffy the Vampire Slayer, of all things, in "The Body"

Attorney Perry Minton? Does Beard not know Betty Blackwell?