All Activity

The “allow folks that are not compatible with Western Civilization into the Country” has been a completely ruinous policy

It's nuanced, right?

CJ Stroud sucked last year. How is he top 6? Unless it is using his rookie year as well.

For those choosing to not call a clear act of war “war,” what would you call it if any country attacked NYC tomorrow with dozens of massive bombs? F.uck Iran for sure (just so some dimwits don’t spin my first sentence as some insane support of them) but if the roles were reversed, you wouldn’t consider it war because….. reasons?

A lot of it is far from "pristine." Most of it is not "developable" because it is far, far away from anywhere where people or business are likely to locate. I'm not against a sale of some of the land, but people have a legitimate concern that this is a foot in the door technique, and that somehow (I wonder how ...) big developer interests will wind up buying the land for far less than what they deem it to be worth after an intensive lobbying effort for water rights, road access, etc. No offense intended here, but sometimes I wonder exactly how much time these proponents of federal land sales have actually spent on western USFS and BLM lands ...

Nice research! As I have said before, that's why I love this board! Fan...atics!

Even being the 4th/5th best QB of an era doesn't necessarily disqualify someone, if other things really stand out. Go back to the late 80s and early 90s. Most had the list as follows: 1. Joe Montana 2. Dan Marino 3. John Elway 4. Jim Kelly / Warren Moon All five were 1st ballot HOF players.

useless drivel. which is so much like what you usually post is. another one bites the ignore list dust.SMH you're Not better than any random troll mate. I see you

First, was a cool read and cool work. Ive been using AI to do some really cool things, and seeing others use it in cool ways is always interesting. So kudos sir But this here makes me wonder about the accuracy, as one of the issues with AI is consistent accuracy in some use cases. Burrow played all 17 games last year and didn't miss anytime. He did in 2023, so if it is coming to conclusions where its weighing time missed by a player who didn't miss anytime it brings into question what other factors its miscalculated.

Two tweets on Hormuz, saying different things

That's really not a lot of players if you think about it. Even if all seven get inducted, they would be the only quarterbacks selected over a period of 15+ years. Brees is a 1st ballot lock next year in 2026. He will be the first QB selected in five years (last was Peyton Manning in 2021). Roethlisberger is a lock , but not sure he's 1st ballot. Some voters are funky about that. Maybe 2027, but possibly a year or two later. Brady is obviously a 1st ballot lock in 2028. Rodgers is still playing, so he won't even be eligible until 2032 at the very earliest. There will be a lot of discussion over the last three. My opinion is that Rivers has the best bet and will probably make it eventually. Eli Manning is a really tough sell for me, and wasn't even a finalist his first year. Matt Ryan is a total wildcard for me. His career looks much better on paper than I ever remember him actually being. All the current guys like Mahomes, Allen, Jackson and Burrow likely have a decade of football in front of them. And they don't become eligible until they have been retired for six seasons. Which means around 2040 and possibly later.

That's just horse *****. If you bomb a country you are at war with them.

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/06/20/ufl-ceo-everythings-on-the-table-during-the-offseason/

Obviously the only possible answer is Reid Ferguson, the long snapper and the most tenured member of the team.

Allen is doing what he can to keep Cook happy. Is he going to say that he doesn't think Cook deserves the money?

This feels a little bit like find the conclusion you want and work your way backwards to find the justification.

- The federal government owns roughly 650 million acres in the U.S. - Nearly 1 out of every 3 acres in the U.S. (29%) is owned and controlled by the federal government - In the West, 1 out of every 2 acres is owned by the federal government. - Over 90% of all federal land is located in the West. https://westerncaucus.house.gov/sites/westerncaucus.house.gov/files/documents/issue 1- public lands, one pager.pdf

Only one finger is stinky?? You are doing something really wrong. Who taught you?? 🤣😂😁🤣🤣😂

How about we focus on the root cause? Blue states and Democratic run cities get their shiit together to prevent those from fleeing.

I can’t work up any outrage over .5-.75% of government owned land being opened up for development. The remaining 99.25-99.5% seems like a lot of wilderness left to appreciate. To quote Frankish, “nobody cares”.

I see kids riding these things on the road all the time with no regard for traffic laws. They’re a problem. It’s a little different but a couple months back I was at the gas station and some kids had taken their quad over there to grab some food. A cop happened to pull in for some gas of his own and then hilarity ensued. I wish I could have stuck around to see when the parents showed up.

I agree with this and it's frustrating that Dem leadership sticks with this line instead of focusing on Trump's lie about no new wars.

Yes. Here is a study from Headwaters Economics, a research firm in Montana. https://headwaterseconomics.org/public-lands/wildfire-public-land-housing/ "Less than 2% of the 181 million acres of Forest Service operational and Department of Interior land included this analysis are close enough to towns with housing needs to be practical for development—around 2.4 million acres. Most of this land is concentrated in a handful of western states—primarily Nevada, Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Utah—and the vast majority of the land is managed by DOI. Forest Service lands offer even fewer options, with only three states (Arizona, Utah, and Oregon) having more than 5,000 acres near towns." Developing housing on public lands may offer benefits in a limited number of communities, but it is not a broad solution. While access to low-cost land can help, housing affordability depends on a complex set of factors—such as construction and labor costs, financing availability and interest rates, insurance access and affordability, and proximity to jobs. In addition, hyperlocal constraints like water supply and community opposition can further restrict feasibility. Beyond this, I don't want our pristine and beautiful natural lands to be taken over for suburban sprawl. It's unsustainable development. Housing policy should be focused on upzoning existing municipal lands and reusing underdeveloped sites, instead of paving over new ones.