BearBryant

Was he actually inside and enclosed box? Or was he on top of the press box with no privacy.  Not approving of his language but get a proper press box where both teams can be enclosed in their own little room in the press box and this wouldn't happen. I'm sure he's not the first  coach to get complaints there. #upgradeyourfacility

These men fought like warhorses tonight. Could have given up in the 1st quarter. Played it down to the last play. Great senior leadership on the team leaves a young bunch of returners ready to pick up where we left off. Very proud of these men! They represented tonight.

Go HJ! Good luck from the Kirbyville Wildcats!

I see we've reeled in another! Yessssss!!!

You know I don't have an issue with the truth I have an issue with your insistent negative rants that many times you spew as fact because you know people. Then you finally let your alligator mouth overload you humming bee butt and get proven pointless. This is America and even hacks like you deserve to speak your mind...unfortunately! I'm done here

Way to support District 12.

+1 ECC

ECC has an indoor training facility, a community that supports bonds for the expansions needed to support our students and a coaching staff that demands good character, clean playing, team work and graciousness when we win or lose. We may not have a state championship yet, but the time will come, regardless I will take what our school and community represents any day of the year. This may be the time that we get that title...and if it's not we will still hold our heads high. We are still playing despite injuries and tragedy....despite others lack of confidence. Our boys are hungry and ready to eat! Go Bucs!

Kirbyville is the visiting team

Who's the mild cats now robanada?

He usually stalks the Vidor threads imparting his "knowledge" over there.  They just dismiss him..  Evidently he has nothing to do so he's going to come over to Kirbyville. Don't let him get to ya

LOL why does anyone respond to the big troll? She cannot form a complete sentence or thought.

Careful. You might be told that it "doesn't make sense" or that you're just "too stupid to understand" or that "you're a liar," my personal favorite. You know, typical troll responses.

You want a legitimate answer?
 
The Supreme Court said that limiting how much you can donate to a political campaign is an unconstitutional violation of the right to freedom of speech. The Democrats don't like that ruling and want to not create a new law (which would also violate our constitutional rights) but to change the Constitution and limit free speech when it comes to politics. The Democrats say yes to changing the Constitution and limiting free speech when it comes to elections and the Republicans say no. 
 
Ohhhh.... but let's not talk about free speech, let's call it what it has been called in this thread, bribery.
 
If you call it legal bribery as the title of the thread suggests, is less money just "a little bribery"? If you offer a cop $500 to drop a citation it would be a bribe but if you only offer him $250, it isn't? That is what the campaign finance laws say. You can donate to someone (bribe by the claim of this thread) and it is perfectly okay but you can only bribe to a certain extent. Tell me where that makes sense. The Dems don't mind donations and sure aren't turning down any money.... they only mind if you get more than they do. So it is okay to bribe people, just keep the bribing "under control".
 
There have been several such First Amendment cases that have thrown out campaign finance laws and in the most recent case (2014), the law (BCRA) allowed the "bribery"..... but you had to stop it 60 days before the election. Again, tell me where that makes any sense. Yes, you can put your money in electronic (television, radio, etc.) campaigning but you can't do it right at the end. Apparently the Dems think that bribery is perfectly okay to bribe 61 days out from an election but don't do it inside of 60 days.   And for that, they want to change the Constitution. 

You and I both know that's just the narrative they want to sell you. Have you seen how much GE donated to the Obama campaign? They don't want to give that up, they just want moderates, independents and libertarians, who generally all hate big corporate donations, to think they want to give it up.

Yeah, and I'm sure the Democrats were just so hesitant to take those checks.

For real?  Can you use a legit source besides "The Nation"?   Another source could just as easily title this "Democrats try to end free speech"
 
How would Obama fund raise if he wasn't able to offer $100,000 golf outings to his cronies?

I disagree tragic hippy.  I've never seen anything other than him take a stance against conservatives or Republicans.  I'm a conservative Democrat but I can't vote against my conscience therefore I don't mind giving my vote to the Republicans. But like I said... I'm withholding judgement for now. 

Big girl for sure.

Enlightened chosen one isn't far behind her but il withhold complete judgement for now

Don't let her suck you in.  SHe has absolutely no idea what she is talking about anyways so what does it matter?  Everyone knows that she can't hold her own in here.  Thinking or putting together a coherent argument is not her forte. 

Don't let her suck you in.  SHe has absolutely no idea what she is talking about anyways so what does it matter?  Everyone knows that she can't hold her own in here.  Thinking or putting together a coherent argument is not her forte. 

Don't let her suck you in.  SHe has absolutely no idea what she is talking about anyways so what does it matter?  Everyone knows that she can't hold her own in here.  Thinking or putting together a coherent argument is not her forte. 

Call you an idiot that's now officially beneath contempt. That's what.
 
Your comparison of Hawaii and Ukraine is bogus. End of conversation.

Did you actually just accuse me of lying?
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii#Overthrow_of_1893.E2.80.94the_Republic_of_Hawaii_.281894.E2.80.931898.29
 
 
 
 
Further reading will reveal to you that it was not until the following presidential administration that Hawaii's annexation became a serious possibility, and that President Cleveland, who was a friend of the Hawaiian queen's, wanted nothing to do with it. The first democratic, pro-American reform in Hawaii took place in 1887, a full decade before territorial annexation would be granted.
 
Most importantly, however, is that US military forces never invaded Hawaii prior to their democratic revolution, unlike in the Ukraine, where Putin's forces had invaded Crimea before the election took place.

Let me first recommend that you abandon the personal insults approach, because it is ineffective and convinces nobody of anything. And yes, have Bullets verify that to me. I would dearly love to know how you "help" invest a multibillion dollar portfolio. All the statements you made about portfolio diversification, correlation, yada yada yada, are/have been well known to anyone who is in the business. So spouting a few terms that can easily be found in a few minutes on the internet proves zilch. I know a lot of portfolio managers and interact with them on a regular basis and I can tell you quickly that none of them communicate with other people in the business via personal insults. But go ahead and have Bullets give me the lowdown so I can understand your career better.