SETXsports Staff
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About tvc184

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Location Nederland
  1. Is it true?

    Williams Sessions was removed on July 19, 1993.  Vince Foster died (ruled suicide) on July 20, 1993.   Draw your own conclusions.................. 
  2. Separation of Church and State?

    By the way, the US Constitution hasn't been in effect for thousands of years. 
  3. Separation of Church and State?

    You say some really crazy and at times downright idiotic things but I let me go by as to not take up too much time. Sometimes however........ Tyranny? Persecution? Strife? First a little history. School prayer was allowed in this country under the US Constitution until 1962 in Engel v. Vitale when the Supreme Court ruled that saying a nondenominational prayer before school violated the First Amendment under freedom of religion or what is called the establishment clause. Up until 1962 and almost 200 years of history in this country, how much tyranny happened? How much strife?  I am not knocking the ruling but the belief that we suffered strife and tyranny because a person said a prayer. And what was the prayer that was ruled on? Here is the tyrannical prayer..... "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and beg Thy blessings upon us, our teachers, and our country.".  It didn't acknowledge which god. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Greek mythology? Please bless our country. Yep, until 1962 that was legal. For almost 200 years we suffered due to that. Up until the year 2000 it was legal for student led prayer at functions like high school football games when a case from right down the road in Santa Fe, TX had their student policy banned by the high court. So more than 200 years this time, we suffered strife, tyranny and persecution because prayers were said over the loud speaker. Mind you, it is still legal to pray but it can't be done over the school (government owned) public address system. Prayer has not and cannot constitutionally be banned. The only prohibition is over whose system (taxpayer's money) it is said with as a matter of the First Amendment. I am not even sure how we survived as a country due to football game prayers. Horrible........ Back to your nonsensical rants. I will not likely respond to them as being too obvious to require a response. Even for you the claims of tyranny and strife seems over the top.....  
  4. Sheriff Clarke

    new tobie said.... "that don't play basketball or football".
  5. Sheriff Clarke

    According to new tobie there are four or five..... So 39,999,995 - 5?
  6. NYT Report

    That photo was from when Obama broke the news to Hillary that Trump had won the Republican primary. 
  7. Sheriff Clarke

    You forgot baseball. It is more like 4 or 5 million but they are silenced and not from the outside. 
  8. Sheriff Clarke

  9. Sheriff Clarke

    Great video when he does it. 
  10. Sheriff Clarke

    Clarke called Eric Holder an SOB.  That already vaults him to near to top of the spectrum for most people....... 
  11. Trumps Mouth

    STOP THE PRESSES!! New revelation shows that Trump has big mouth and never knows when to shut up or stop tweeting! Meanwhile, Apollo 11 lands on the Moon............... 
  12. What are liberals good at?

    I was saying this way before the election.  For some reason it still goes over most Democrat's heads. Trump never got a majority of the Republican's support. He was the lucky odd man left standing after 17 people tossed their hat in the ring, knowing how vulnerable Hillary was and that even early on, knew that the Dems would not allow anyone else to be nominated. Trump has never been popular even among his supporters. He simply wasn't Hillary. Will the Dems ever face up to that? I doubt it. You can youtube all kinds of Democratic opinions that Hillary caused Trump but the mainstream public seems to gloss over that. 
  13. Serious question

    Yes, that is what cost the Dems as they had no real primary. It took an independent in Sanders to even challenge the system as all of the main Democratic players had gotten their marching orders..... stay out and let the queen be crowned.  It backfired on them.
  14. Serious question

    I would guess .... maybe.  McCain would not have a lot of the conservative or GOP vote crossover but he would get some. He would likely have gotten most of the Democrat vote. The Democrats are way more loyal to the party name than actual politics in my opinion. The GOP has a lot more independent thinkers which is why they are always arguing among themselves on who is conservative "enough" whether on candidates or bills/laws. They generally agree with each other on principle but will vote no out of spite if they don't get exactly what they want. The Dems tend to vote more on party based on nothing more than party. They tend to be way more party loyal.  The vote was close enough in some states to possibly make a difference. Some of the crossover vote that Trump got from the Dems would not have swapped if it had been anyone other than Clinton. While I said above the Dems are more likely to vote by party, Hillary was bad enough of a candidate to overcome that. Let's face it, Obama and Clinton are not popular no matter what poll someone spits out. Clinton was a horrible candidate and Obama's reputation and legacy was no help. The bottom line is that had McCain been the Democratic nominee, Trump would not have gotten nearly as much crossover or refusal to vote from the Dems and McCain would have swung some minor GOP votes. It would likely not have been more than 1/2 - 1% in some states but in this close election that may have made the difference.  Hillary was simply so horrible of a candidate, I think you might put any person's name in the, "would ______ have beaten Trump?" and probably end up in the affirmative. 
  15. Texas Shooting

    I would never try to outguess a jury and I would not likely even put money on a jury decision but I can't see a Murder conviction.  I could easily believe Manslaughter which says you kill someone while acting recklessly. Murder requires the intent or knowledge to kill.  I would like to know what the officer saw whether firing at a vehicle moving in any direction. Did he see a muzzle flash near the car? Did the car backfire? Especially if a camera shows something like that, I can envision an acquittal or more likely a Criminal Negligent Homicide conviction where you kill someone but with "criminal negligence".  I think a jury might have a hard time having 12 people believe that the officer "intended" to kill that child while knowing that he wasn't acting in self defense. I can believe that a jury would find that made a terribly stupid decision and it cost a life... which would likely be Manslaughter. But.... I would never try to outguess a jury.... especially since we know very little about the case.