Jump to content

Build Wall or Shut Down the Border


Hagar

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, stevenash said:

Uh, then give me an example of the Republicans making last minute sexual misconduct allegations against a Supreme Court nominee.

The last three a Democrat President  got to appoint have been women, that’s going back 25 years. I guess that vicious predator RBG must’ve slipped by because of the Republican Senators’ magnanimity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, UT alum said:

The last three a Democrat President  got to appoint have been women, that’s going back 25 years. I guess that vicious predator RBG must’ve slipped by because of the Republican Senators’ magnanimity.

In other words, no supreme court nominee has had sexual impropriety allegations launched at them at the last minute by the Republicans,right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stevenash said:

In other words, no supreme court nominee has had sexual impropriety allegations launched at them at the last minute by the Republicans,right?

If you think they wouldn’t use those kind of tactics if the opportunity arose, you’re fooling yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mat said:

I have conceded. I now have to agree with the dems about this being a total waist of money. Their underlying agenda; once they gain more control in a couple years will be to open our borders thus making any wall building cost a total waist of money.

That’s why we need a wall.  They all agree to give more money for drones and agents at the border.  That can easily be turned off when they get power while the wall will still be standing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, UT alum said:

If you think they wouldn’t use those kind of tactics if the opportunity arose, you’re fooling yourself.

No doubt they would if they had substantiated proof.  I’d be embarrassed if they brought someone like Christine Ford to a hearing.  

Of course, if Trump nominates Amy Barrett, the Dems will go after Catholics.  Since most (all?) on the Far Left are anti-Christianity, it could be revealing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Hagar said:

No doubt they would if they had substantiated proof.  I’d be embarrassed if they brought someone like Christine Ford to a hearing.  

Of course, if Trump nominates Amy Barrett, the Dems will go after Catholics.  Since most (all?) on the Far Left are anti-Christianity, it could be revealing.  

Joe freakin’ McCarthy. I rest my case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Hagar said:

No doubt they would if they had substantiated proof.  I’d be embarrassed if they brought someone like Christine Ford to a hearing.  

Of course, if Trump nominates Amy Barrett, the Dems will go after Catholics.  Since most (all?) on the Far Left are anti-Christianity, it could be revealing.  

And his lawyer Roy Cohn, Trump’s lawyer until he got sick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,971
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    TankParrish83
    Newest Member
    TankParrish83
    Joined



  • Posts

    • Sure.  You reassign an employee and they leave voluntarily instead of being fired and being open to litigation.  The outcome is the same, but you are making my point.  The superintendent and AD and principal are all empowered to make personnel decisions.  Instead of accepting the decision made, you talk about lawyering up, no one else was reprimanded, railroad job.  I am old enough to remember when high school sports taught life lessons...accountability being chief among them.
    • I know absolutely nothing about the situation, but I do know head coaches of sports other than the AD have actual teaching assignments, and I know from my wife having worked in the sped department of multiple schools that it’s not uncommon at all for coaches to shirk those duties.  It could very well be that this was the case at BC.  Or not, I don’t know.  Just bringing this up to point out the fact that, although many coaches only want to worry about coaching, they generally have several other responsibilities at the school.  some of them neglect or ignore these duties entirely.  If he’s been written up for other issues before, it’s a dumb argument to say “he was punished for this and others were not”.  If he had a pile of write ups in his file and they did not then it makes sense that the punishments were different.  
    • He wasn’t fired, he was reassigned and people get reassigned all the time. If he was actually fired, then you would have a point, but he wasn’t fired. Based on the information presented here no way this would stand if they fired him and he lawyered up. 
    • I heard the assistant was going to get this job and assume it was referring to the old Vidor coach, Nate Smith.  I always thought he did more with less at Vidor and can't help but think he shares some responsibility in Vidor's recent success. 
    • Classic Bridge City.  Always someone else's fault, refs/umpires cheated, AD with an agenda, yada, yada, yada.  As far as I can tell it's damn near impossible to get fired at these schools so when someone does get fired, it's usually something.  Drama at Bridge City is a constant.  The guy did a good job coaching basketball and I'm sure he'll continue that somewhere else.  Time to move on.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...