Joe Miner

Difference between financial planning and accounting. One is after the fact, one is before.

Did you even watch his game against ____?!?! This kid doesn't have the _____ or the _____ to go against the top _____ of the NFL! Nix really blew this pick, and it smells of Ralph meddling. With _____ still on the board picking a _____ at that position makes absolutely no sense.

It's coincidentally about the cost for an average woman's contraception over the course of her sexually active life. 68ish years. Of course as we become a more sexually free society, the average woman of today who is having sex about 10 times/day could easily double that in something like 20 years. So the actual cost is probably a lot higher.

It's Monday. This better be the stupidest **** I hear all week. Or it's gonna be a very long week.

I'm not seeing a problem with Obama in that article.

Wow. Someone woke up on the stupid side of the bed this morning.

She must have been hot.

It's not my mind I want her on. Hey-O

Why would I want to read anything that Tyson says, when listening to it should provide exponentially more entertainment?

It's not what age you die, but how long you spend pooping in your own pants before you go.

After taking a look at the inbred goobers at GC, I dare you to dip anything in the chocolate waterfall after one of them.

Ahh, the old "It's not my rights they're trampling, so I don't care" argument. Douche

Fixed.

You do realize this is the Hot Pocket generation? Supreme Court Rulings in 2 minutes. Ding!

The local radio was reporting this story this morning. Something about so far this year he'd missed 19 of 41 work days, and then asked for a vacation day on Super Tuesday. They declined his request for a vacation day, and he took it off anyway. At some point this incredibly smart guy should realize it's not such a smart idea to be a complete dickwad.

From his posts I don't think he's ignorant about the law. But he's made a ton of assumptions in how others have and should have interpreted parts of it without knowing all of the evidence. I haven't disagreed with his interpretation of the law. I'm just sure he doesn't have all of the facts to put the evidence in the proper perspective to claim that something should or should not have happened. It's one thing to understand how the law works. It's another to second guess those that are looking at the facts of the case when you yourself don't have all of the information that they do. And it seems pretty apparent that his argument is really just to rework/do away with the stand your ground law. Which again, without knowing the facts of what happened here makes that premise shaky at best. If he wants to discuss that, don't use an ongoing investigation that's so far full of a lot of speculation and not many known facts.

You keep redirecting your focus there gumshoe. A couple more Scoobie Snacks, and you'll blow this case wide open. Did you take a law class at some point, and are now trying an exercise in real life application? Hopefully you did better in class that you're doing here.

You sons-a-bitches are gonna pay when you get my hopes up, and they rule that the law is constitutional.

What was that about ad hominem?

What you think you know doesn't mean jack. So until you actually know something stfu. You just keep repeating the same stupid assumptions throughout this thread, not many of which are based anywhere close to a known fact.

Harsh words for Al and Jesse there.

So no, he didn't. Thanks for playing.

But your beliefs are based on your assumptions on the areas you listed. Some of them aren't based on any proven facts. And the couple of facts that you listed don't actually have any meaning unless you've already drawn a negative conclusion about Zimmerman. If the police and the DA didn't feel the need to arrest him, why would you push for an arrest? Especially considering that they have far more facts and evidence at their disposal than you do? I don't have an opinion on this as I don't know what happened other than there was some type of altercation and one guy ended up dead. If there's evidence to support an arrest and a trial great. If there's no evidence or not enough, then that's fine too.

I'm not saying it's an open and shut case. He just keeps asking questions that he doesn't have answers to with assumptions that the police and DA haven't already asked and answered those questions and additional ones. He's no better than the idiot reporters that keep writing stories that speculate there's more to this story than the police want you know. And that undisclosed knowledge obviously points to something sinister. There's obviously more to this story than the police are telling the public. There always is. Why? Because cases aren't tried in the court of public opinion. But let's keep making assumptions and vilifying one side or the other before anything even gets to trial. Anything can always happen in a court of law regardless of facts.

I also don't often talk to my 4 year old about calculus or physics. Shh...