biggentleben

This thread is just...wow, and not in a good way.

From my interactions with the woman, I'm not sure she truly is as interested in justice as she is in her own press clippings. That's damned scary on the highest bench in the land.

This is from Thursday's high school action in South Dakota: https://t.co/xPENaLvlWs

There are some great places here that are starting to sell nationally and even internationally with some very interesting packing techniques. My baby brother got some venison in DC from a SD retailer that he was very pleased with.

You're right, but one of the two guys I was thinking of Brett hitting against is the guy the answer to your question hit against (after doing the research), so I'm giving myself partial credit. For some reason, I just didn't realize that there was that much time between All-Star appearances there. I've got a good one for the next question...

Just hitting, not collecting a hit...I'm going to go with Hank Aaron or Willie Mays. My other line of thinking is George Brett.

That's the whole point. Those crimes you describe being proliferated with guns didn't start with guns. That was escalation. Protecting with escalating weaponry does not mean that it's an intelligent or even logical thing to do. Once again, I've not even implied, let alone suggested, that all guns be banned, so to go along those lines is where ignorance and stupidity become words that can enter the conversation. I own multiple shotguns myself that I use for hunting and keeping cattle safe on my father's farm when I'm on the farm. I have no qualms with someone even owning a gun for the purpose of having a singular gun in the home for protection purposes. Where I find the hypocrisy is the people who have (as one case here recently) 17 handguns in their home, yet they cannot afford to pay rent or keep their heat on and have their children removed from them. Those same people will scream 2nd amendment, just as has been hollered here. So let's examine that second amendment - coming from a very non-legal, this is my opinion only, examination: The actual full text: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." No single person I know who owns a handgun intends to ever utilize that handgun within the confines of a militia. The arguments used for possessing guns are always individual rights, nothing to do with the protection of the country, the original intent of the second amendment. I do find it interesting that the position of a longtime abolitionist, Lysander Spooner, is basically the calling card of those who are all for individual gun rights interpretations of the 2nd amendment. Especially since many of those who get those same ridiculous amount of guns do such because of their fear of people who are another color or race very frequently.

Crazy is that he actually played two seasons longer than Ruth, but he was effectively finished as an effective player by then, so Ruth made two All-Star teams, while Hornsby made none.

Y'know, I've had guns around my whole life. I've never once needed one for protection from another human. From animals, sure, but from humans, no. I work with the most intellectually disturbed people within my state, and I've never felt the need to have any level of protection with me when working with them. If I can feel that I need no physical protection to work with those who have the least rational thinking of any human on the planet, how on earth can any person feel they "need" a gun for protection? We've created a culture of guns. Resolving conflict without a gun is plenty possible, but requires work and compromise, and we only have to look to our own leaders to see how little that anyone in Washington wants to work or compromise.

yup. 301, two more than Salmon, who was my guess, which was why I was bummed that I was wrong!

So, I have to go through federally-mandated and -operated background checks to become a foster parent or take kids in my church on a youth trip, but not buy a gun. Makes sense.

Yeah, I didn't even mention that the health thing would probably help to rectify the dozen+ surgeries I've had to my eyes, but there's a lot that I gained from those experiences as well (and no, not just more clear vision).

Always intelligence. I've crossed the 75-pound loss mark in 3 months, and I've hit the gym all of about 1.5 times weekly, and if I can do that at my age and history of abusing my body, it truly shows how accessible health truly is. Keeping oneself healthy would be something that extra intelligence would be useful for, actually. I also have no designs or desires on immortality of my physical person, so twice the intelligence would allow me to make intellectual contributions that will allow for part of the immortality that I would be okay with achieving.

USMC, whether or not you and I agree on topics on this forum, I will 100% give you this respect. I have never come away from a discussion with you feeling like you were not willing to at least consider my point of view, and that's refreshing in a discussion on political grounds, because all too often in this country, we attach ourselves to a label (Republican, Democrat, Liberal, Conservative, Libertarian, Socialist, Nudist, wait, how did that slip in there?, etc.), and we will go down fighting for anything and everything associated with our particular label. What is refreshing, regardless of beliefs at the end of the day is someone willing to at least listen to the point of view, challenge the status quo (because, let's face it, many on this board lean more toward the left than the right, so there's often more strength in numbers in that direction), but at the end of the day separate personal feelings from the discussion and hopefully both leave the discussion more informed in our own beliefs on a particular issue, even if neither party changes a single bit on those beliefs. I'd like to thank you for that.

That is 100% the issue. People like to bitch about the "forced" insurance, except that there are still thousands without insurance, especially those who are disabled, due to states opting out of Medicaid/Medicare expansions. When someone who is disabled is at least on Medicaid, he/she is given proper care, tracked through the health care system, and pharmaceuticals are tracked. Instead, we recently dealt with an issue where a disabled person without insurance was able to get 5 different prescriptions for Vicodin by going to the different clinics in town with legitimate pain. Getting cash backing from a source, the person then paid cash for each of those medications and was selling them around town for significant mark up. The same person on Medicaid would have been immediately denied the second script due to having filled the same medication on his/her record. Cutting off funding for those who are unable to afford the insurance simply creates loopholes that leads to more costs for taxpayers in additional visits to the ER (two who happen to be on taxpayer funded Medicaid so far have ended up in the ER after mixing the ill-gotten Vicodin with alcohol - which is how I ended up in contact with the situation in the first place), additional costs in jailing, and additional costs in court time/fees/attorney fees. It ends up hurting the taxpayer further to deny expanded Medicaid than to actually do the expansion.

The leader technically played after the inception of the All-Star game, however.

Dammit!! Just did the B-Ref Play Index on it. Salmon was a very good guess, but not the right one. My first instinct on old-timers was right, though.

The first All-Star game was in 1933, so my first instinct was to think about guys who were retired by then, but the all-timers like Ruth were still playing. I knew Davis made an All-Star team because I remember having the Topps card of it when he was with the Giants. So I figured it'd be around 300 or less. My guess would be Tim Salmon, just knowing that he finished at 299 as a quirk sort of thing.

Added sugar is a big one, as is fast food for me. I've not had fast food outside of sub sandwiches since November. Coffee, however, will have to be taken from my cold, dead hands.

It's not crust, it's just pizza. It's like an alcoholic having a drink for me. It's one of the things I just need to cross off the list, and honestly, I haven't missed it at all.

Pizza's on my no-go list right now, so I've turned it down plenty of times lately. People look at me as if I'm a victim of the plague or something. However, my scale tells me I'm doing what I need to be doing.

So, Robert Flores has now announced he's leaving ESPN. They've lost both of their Football Today podcast hosts in less than a month. They keep trying to play it off, but they're losing the good people they have and hemorrhaging money. It's going to be a hard fall without some action fast.

The better one was a one I saw that said "dysfunctional family" and it showed a tear with the lower right corner torn away from the picture.

I saw someone on my Facebook time line swayed today by the fact that Michael Tait of the Christian music group Newsboys endorsed Ted Cruz to become a Cruz supporter today. Of course, my interactions with Tait would put Cruz and he in similar company as far as slimy say-one-thing-about-God-do-another-thing-to-defy-those-words sorts of guys, but it did make a statement to me about how sad the GOP platform has become. I'm a Christian unapologetically, but if the best candidate is an agnostic, an athiest, or *gasp* a Muslim, they'll get my vote. I want the best leaders and the best people in Washington, not simply people who tell me they believe similarly to me. Jimmy Swaggart proclaimed similarly as well, and Fr. Curtis Wehmeyer preached from the pulpit on Sundays as well, but that doesn't mean I'd want either representing what a Christian is and should be to the world. Most of the people claiming Christ in the political landscape are doing such for political gain, and that's the most sickening part of it all.

Legally, absolutely. That couple could go on social media and blast the bakery if the bakery hadn't explicitly stated that they won't make a cake for a homosexual couple, and that could be very bad for their business, but there really couldn't be legal ramifications. It's not a matter of moving goalposts at all.