WhitewalkerInPhilly

To be fully honest, I was not happy with the Allen pick on draft night. But I just got done watching his snaps, and it looks like all my concerns were addressed. Accuracy issues? 9 of 13. Even more important, there was only one head stretching throw that I saw. (The first pass). The others were drops, quick shots to avoid a sack or throwing it up in the red zone in a spot where only his receiver had a shot. Footwork? That TD pass was a thing of beauty. Not ready for an NFL defense? He took his time, kept his eyes downfield. Yes, there were rookie mistakes and all the caveats of preseason apply, but he definitely earned time with the 1s.

Just as a note Baldy is very well regarded in the Philly area. His review of Allen is overall positive with enough critique to not be Pollyanna

At this point, I am pretty sure you are right. As much as I might wish it, I think they are pointedly not having him start week 1. After the first preseason game, I am ok with that plan. He clearly has a lot of potential, but he has a lot to learn.

I can fully agree with you on the bolded part. I don't exactly agree with the animus behind a lot of it, but there are legitimate national security concerns with open borders. At the very least, you need monitoring and review. I personally think that a more fluid response force makes sense, with a lot of coordination with military intelligence and other intelligence services. It' would also help with smuggling and trafficking through sea ports as well. The saying I heard was "the easiest way to smuggle a WMD into the country is in a bag of weed". I honestly think we can have better, more effective national security using those methods rather than a static enplacement. As to the other part...I concede you may have a point. I think that you can shame each side into doing the right thing, but the Democratic leadership is so laughably inept that I could not bear to stay with them. They might turn down a deal that gives them half of what they want if they thought they couldn't have repercussions. I am all for draining the swamp and I hoped that the term limits promise would actually yield something. But all I've seen is things get swampier.

OK, there's a lot to unpack. I will deal with boyst's rambling in a second. First, to the bolded point: ok, that's fair, but that's why I specified anti-trafficking as a pure crime bill. There are trafficked people who wind up all over the country, and who enter from all points. And that's not even talking about the financial aspects of the crime. If you keep it away from immigration, the Dems in either house lose their talking point. If the White House can't wrangle the Republicans with a law and order bill...well, then they really are impotent.they have egg on their face. Also, that was more of a retort about how somehow, business manages to occur in the Senate. The crux of my argument is that if you can get something through the House and the Dems stonewall a "help the oppressed undocumented immigrants" bill, Here is what I saw about the Senate propose compromise bill. https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/17/politics/dreamers-bill-immigration-graham-durbin-congress/index.html So, not perfect, but Wall money (I still contend that it's a stupid AF idea), a permanent DACA fix, no visa lottery and cuts on chain migration. As to whether it would pass the House...well, that's another problem, but at least it would have been something. So, I'm not actually hearing a critique of my proposal, as much as "I hate Obama RAH RAH RAH. I don't understand the word "authoritarian, because brokering people into unpopular political choices is just about the opposite of that" Don't get run over on your way out.

Well, that's funny. I could have sworn that a Supreme Court justice and multiple cabinet positions were appointed. I seem to recall a compromise bill that was ready to be passed that would have fixed DACA and funded the wall...but there was something about "shithole countries" and Trump killed it. When Lindsey Graham has moral high ground, hoo boy... I have no idea what this subpoena is about, but if you are talking about investigation files, they had enough for the Nunez memo...and much much more, which of course Nunez redacted to the point of uselessness. But ok, let's assume for a hot second that yes, the Democrats will simply oppose everything that Trump proposes on principle. So let them do it. Pass a clean bill with zero immigration ties in the House, focusing solely on dismantling human trafficking. Give resources to go after the white collar criminals and money launderers and "legitimate" business fronts, and breaking up organized crime. Make it about the plight of the enslaved persons, many of whom are children. Drop it into the Senate. If Democrats oppose it on principle, you have a rallying cry for the midterms. "Look at these Obstructionists! We tried to help the people they swore to help, and they slapped us in the face on spite". The Blue Wave never happens. Republicans set the legislative agenda for at least two more years. Tell me why that's a bad idea.

DC Tom pulled it up. You know I have to hand it to you. A ten percent bump is definitely something, and Trump does deserve credit for that. I just don't get why, if it is such an issue, why they aren't doing more? Republicans have the House, and can you imagine the blowback if Democrats voted down a clean anti-trafficking bill.It's handled by the DOJ, not ICE. It's not immigration law, and ? it happens all over the country so it's not just a Southern border issue. They would have zero leverage or talking points, especially with the midterms coming up.

Great, a statement. That and $50 will get you a full tank of gas. Where is the data that says that the cheerleading does jack squat?

And my focus was on the "maybe he was trying to swerve out of the way" bit. People were, and clearly, still are bending over backwards to defend this guy. Take a look through that thread for the full context, and it is so, so much worse. There are people who cheered the And believe me, I am criticizing Antifa. They did more damage than I thought. You are not seeing me put on a bandana and stomping people. But man, their body count is lower, and it is in a direct response to opposing a violent movement. And, to quote B-man again "I can't go as far as calling those azzholes, "victims"...........they put themselves there, and I would bet a few of them started fights also " Not that I agree with them, but him turning around with this bull **** is hilarious As to "they have the right to free speech", the truth is that they do. They are free to vent and shout. But they storm a college campus with torches, show up armed with rifles, violently bludgeon people and run them over with cars...do you actually think that arming yourseldf to defend yourself is unjustified? Because if you do, it runs counter to the endless guns rights activism I have heard around here. No, of course not. There are plenty of Republicans who are disgusted with Trump too. I'm just calling up reminders of how many of you were singing a very different tune about protestors a year ago. The Neo-Nazi who ran over people with his car in Charlottesville last year.

The selective spinning is hilarious! That was a quick sample, but yes, you kept giving the benefit of the doubt to a murderous Nazi. And boyst is doubling down on blaming the woman who got murdered!

Ooooooh yes. Let's roll that footage of posters on here making excuses for the guy in the car. It is found here: This one is from B-Man From Rob's House Take You To Tasker B-Man again *takes bow*

...literal calls for Lebensraum and murdering neo-Nazi's who beat people to a pulp and murdered and maimed people with their cars. vs. Literally anti-Facist (not communist, just anti-fascism), who shoved people and threw eggs. To you, these are equivalent. Good to see where we are.

The man is saying that murders and assaults, committed by Neo-Nazis, with abundant video evidence, is fake news, and I am the piece of trash? "Well, one side is in favor of the violent genocide, and the other side is...against violent genocide" Yes. These things are equivalent. /s Aren't you tired of being on the wrong side of history?

Are you f***ing kidding me? https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/driver-accused-of-plowing-into-charlottesville-crowd-killing-heather-heyer-due-in-court/2017/12/13/6cbb4ce8-e029-11e7-89e8-edec16379010_story.html?utm_term=.759a5e42784c

No. That was wrong. They shouldn't have stooped to that level. But when the armed Nazi's are in the streets, where last year they beat and murdered people, and your first reaction is "Well an Antifa person shoved a guy" (I watched the video. He shoved a cameraman) it shows your priorities pretty well. I watched people here bend over backwards to justify RUNNING PEOPLE OVER IN WITH A CAR. And one cameraman gets shoved and it's "why is the left so violent?" EDIT: Yes, they also threw eggs and water bottles. If you think that beating people to a pulp and vehicular homicide roughly equates to that, you very clearly as delusional and are looking any reason to diminish that side that is not violent Nazis.

I'm not upset at the lack of the wall. That he hasn't done it doesn't bother me other than the obvious broken promise that you lot seem to not care about. The Wall is a monumentally stupid idea. It deserves a literally monument, one in a museum, for the crystallization of stupidity that it is. For one, it is probably the least conservative thing ever. It is a massive publics work project, that overrules multiple states. It requires seizing land from citizens via Eminent Domain. Enforcing and maintaining it would require epic deployment of manpower and tax dollars. I would have sworn that a liberal had proposed it. And for all that, it is almost certain to be ineffective. Cartels use catapults to launch their drug shipments over walls. They have excavated tunnels under the ground. The wall does not effect sea travel, and it's been said that the easiest to way to smuggle a WMB into the US is in a bushel of marijuana via our seaports. It does not stop cartels from using mules to fly to Canada and come in over that border. There is no current way to effectively search every car going through our checkpoints along the southern border. Ineptitude. Graft. Pork barrel spending. It is everything that made me want to walk away from the Dems, bundled up in one package. A...well regarded fact checker service? This disturbs you? Things are beginning to make sense here.

OK. That is bad. Now...tell me what, precisely, this administration has done that shows on iota of effectiveness at stopping that? If you have verifiable hard statistics and data show me that then, hey, Trump has done two things I can get behind. I looked for the last half hour or so and can't find anything. What I do know is what isn't working, and what isn't likely to work. A border wall is ineffective. https://www.newsweek.com/2017/03/17/why-mexican-border-wall-wont-stop-drug-cartels-564112.html In fact, stricter border laws in other parts of the world have increased it. http://sciencenordic.com/do-stricter-border-controls-increase-human-trafficking If you can find the data, I'll mea culpa.

Nope. Absolutely dead serious. Of course, I read news apart from a twitter feed, so I can see the difference. Believe me, I was looking to vote Republican in 2016. I enjoy capitalism, and I like the parts of tax reform that reduced taxes for the middle class, and the parts that look to help small businesses. I am annoyed at SJW's who will bite your ear off about the correct pronoun, and safe spaces and trigger warnings. But no, one way went "Let's build an extremely costly and ineffective wall that will require the seizure of land from private citizens" and "The man who tanked the USFL, has a precedent for not paying people who built his buildings, is on trial for fraud and won't release his tax returns is the perfect choice to help the economy!" I would say that the #WalkAway movement is misguided...but then, that would require the memes to be of real people, not stock photos with quotes on them. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/walkaway-campaign-stock-photos/ Yes. I fact check.

Please see my above answer where I step by step laid out the Pulitzer prize winning resource as evidence. Here is something else for you to read when you have time: https://medium.com/nonzerosum/umberto-eco-ur-facism-9d9cc1e9f317

"Well, they are advocating for the systematic dehumanizaing of ethnic groups they don't like. I hear them chanting "Jew will not replace us", "blood and soil!", meaning they are advocating seizing territory with force, and "Fire up the ovens", references systematic murder. They're arming themselves with bats and guns and taking to the streets! We have to meet them!" "Such violence! So much for the tolerant left!"

Oh, this is going to be fun. I'll be linking a lot to Politifact. "Kids in cages" is the quippy way to describe children being separated from their parents, taking away legal guardianship and adopting them out, but as I type that out it's much worse. The word choice comes from the original Associated Press article. Not some left wing crazy person blog. https://www.apnews.com/9794de32d39d4c6f89fbefaea3780769 This was not done in Obama's term. They were minors who didn't have parents and who came over themselves. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jun/25/brad-parscale/tyes-immigrant-children-detained-under-obama-they-/ The situation was begun under Donald Trump, and when the heat was on, he claimed he couldn't fix it and that it was Democratic law. This was false. He said that an executive order couldn't stop it. Then he did just that. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jun/25/brad-parscale/tyes-immigrant-children-detained-under-obama-they-/ I know the idea of children in cages must give you a hard on, but this one lies heavily with 45. Also false. You can argue that he didn't do enough, but hey, try to be at least factual next time: https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/dec/12/2017-lie-year-russian-election-interference-made-s/ https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/aug/17/donald-trump/donald-trump-wrong-charlottesville-counter-protest/ Well, there is him defending the white nationalists who swarmed over a college campus with torches and beating up students. "There were people in that rally. I looked the night before. If you look, they were people protesting very quietly the taking down the statue of Robert E. Lee. I am sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day, it looked like they had some rough, bad people, neo-Nazis, white nationalists, whatever you want to call them. But you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest and very legally protest. "Because I don’t know if you know, they had a permit. The other group didn’t have a permit. So I only tell you this. There are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country, a horrible moment. But there are two sides to the country." I'm a much bigger fan of NPR and the BBC, thank you very much. Enjoy your facts!

I know you are sad that the Nazi rally was a bust

Well, I walked away from the Democrats and became and Independent. Then, the Republicans nominated the most corrupt person imaginable. And then he was endorsed by the KKK and neo-Nazi's. And then he won. And then he defended Nazis while courting their vote, raised the costs of health care, gave tax cuts to the super rich while adding sunset clauses to the ones for the middle class (and that is his greatest accomplishment), and decided to put children in cages all while crying about how it's the fault of the big nasty Democrats. And now, it's been revealed that he actively knew about attempts by a foreign superpower to provide intel on his opponent. And that is just what he has admitted to. (After repeatedly changing his story) So yeah, he's made a wonderful case as to why I should go back.

Yes, I honestly think so. If they are letting him go all out in the second half, with people that he's been growing chemistry with and playing against a weaker Panthers D...I think he has the potential to make a name for himself.

The thing that jumped out at me was seeing that Ross Cockrell wound up in Carolina. Interesting, I was annoyed when we cut him and he went on to be solid for the Steelers. He would fit will in our new D, and hey, a former Panther