Jump to content

alexhortdog95

Members
  • Content Count

    1,004
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

alexhortdog95 last won the day on November 19 2014

alexhortdog95 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

456 Excellent

About alexhortdog95

  • Rank
    Scout Team
  • Birthday 11/03/1976

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Omaha, NE
  • Interests
    Hanging out with the fam, serving God, smoking meats!

Recent Profile Visitors

2,967 profile views
  1. How bad must Helfrich be as a person for someone to not want him? Eeeesh..
  2. Still hoping this happens. Even some Duck fans believe that the issues he had were more the fault of Chip Kelly (had an 18 month show cause on him) : https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/pac12/2013/06/26/oregon-football-ncaa-investigation-probation/2459297/ https://fishduck.com/2017/07/in-defense-of-mark-helfrich-recruiting/ I thought that the Ducks were extremely potent when he was the head guy. Look at who they had when he was the head guy: DeAnthony "Black Mamba" Thomas Royce Freeman Marcus Mariotta Justin Herbert Dude was 37-16 in 4 seasons up there. Two conference championships. A trip to the Natty. As an assistant in the NFL - his first year, he had the 11th ranked offense in the NFL. Trubisky and Cohen both made the Pro Bowl that year. Tell me the guy wouldn't be a welcome addition....? P.S. - We gotta stop missing on guys here, and skipping over some obvious good choices. This one stills stings, as I'm a huge fan of the guy: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2297257-nebraska Coach O was here. Guy was passed over, went home, his head guy got fired, he takes over, and all that guy did was have a player win the Heisman, win the SEC, and is making Gumbo with a Natty ring right now.
  3. Bears just fired a ton of coaches, including one Mark Helfrich. That guy seems a bit down on his luck after getting fired from Oregon. Hmm....if only there was a head coach he worked with at Oregon who needs an O coordinator who is familiar with him.......
  4. alexhortdog95

    Boxing

    Feb 22nd..... Both men's chance to shut the other one up. Wilder has one of the greatest right hands in heavyweight boxing history. Fury is game and has heart.
  5. That's the look my mom would give me if she caught me talking in church while the preacher was preaching.
  6. Some doozies from today: Rep. Mike Kelly, a Republican from Pennsylvania, said that, like the Pearl Harbor attack, today "is another date that will live in infamy." “On December 7, 1941, a horrific act happened in the United States, and it's one that President Roosevelt said, “This is a date that will live in infamy.” Today, December 18th, 2019, is another date that will live in infamy," he said. Fact Check: Republican wrongly uses Sixth Amendment to defend Trump "The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right of the defendant to face their accusers,” Loudermilk claimed. “But not only have the Democrats prohibited Republicans and the President from questioning the so-called whistleblower, his identity has been kept secret." Facts First: Loudermilk is wrong, Trump does not have a constitutional right to face the whistleblower. The Sixth Amendment only applies to criminal prosecutions. The constitutional rights of criminal defendants do not apply to public officials in a House of Representatives impeachment process. Republican congressman says Jesus had more due process before crucifixion than Trump “Before you take this historic vote today, one week before Christmas, I want you to keep this in mind: When Jesus was falsely accused of treason, Pontius Pilate gave Jesus the opportunity to face his accusers. During that sham trial, Pontius Pilate afforded more rights to Jesus than the Democrats have afforded this President in this process," Loudermilk said. Vice President Pence calls the House impeachment vote "a disgrace" “It’s great to be with so many friends today, and to be out of Washington, DC,” the Vice President joked to the crowd. “Truthfully, friends, what’s happening on Capitol Hill is a disgrace. The first day of this administration, Democrats in Washington have been trying to overturn the results of the last election, and they’re back at it again today with their partisan impeachment vote.” Georgia congressman blasts "Democrats' sham process" Rep. Buddy Carter, a Republican from Georgia, criticized the Democrats' handling of the impeachment process against President Trump during today's debate. He argued that the Democrats' process has made "a mockery of the rules of the House and is frankly dangerous to this country." Republican congresswoman says impeachment has distracted from real issues Rep. Carol Miller, a Republican from West Virginia, mentioned the opioid epidemic, which has ravaged Appalachia, as one of the key issues that has been ignored while lawmakers have moved forward with the impeachment of President Trump. "We still have not finished securing our border. The opioid epidemic still rages in our communities and we still have not reached a bipartisan resolution on drug pricing." GOP congressman says there is "zero direct evidence" showing Trump engaged in an abuse of power Rep. Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, defended President Trump against the articles of impeachment. "The Democrats know there is zero direct evidence to show that President Trump engaged in any abuse of power. Their entire case is based on hearsay, speculation and conjecture. There's not a single fact witness that with provide testimony to support their baseless allegations. They are trying to meet their own arbitrary, completely reckless and Machiavellian timeline to take down a President that they loathe." Johnson said.
  7. Here's my opinion on all of this (not that it matters, but I think context is getting mixed up): As always, I'll use myself as an example of this. When I was a kid, around 8 years old, I think, my older brother (the 'finger') and I (the 'bagman') got the bright idea to start a crime spree (lasted all of a day) in which we would go to one of the grocery stores on the way home, and would steal things. My brother would pick out the items we would 'lift', and would put them into my bag, and we'd go home. We got away with some Pop Tarts on the first try. Like most criminals, we decided to step up our game. So, the next day, we went into the same store, and my brother picks up a very large bag of caramels, and begins to put them into my bag. The store manager stepped into the opposite end of the aisle. When my brother saw him, he said, "Sir," held up the bag of caramels, and put the bag of caramels back onto the shelf, and we ran out of the store. About 10 minutes later, as we walked home thinking, "Whew, we dodged a bullet there," we turned down a side street. While walking down that side street, there was a honk behind us. We turned around, and there was the manager in his car, and behind him, a police officer. We both paused and immediately, I thought of all of the horrible stories my mother told us about Federal PMITA prison. Thankfully, neither the manager or the police officer got out of the car. The manager simply said, "Hey, you kids, don't let me ever see you in my store again, or I'll have you arrested for shoplifting!" Needless to say, I didn't step foot into that store until well after I was grown, married, with children. And that was only because my Father-In-Law needed to stop there. Why the story? Well, it went to our intent in our brief crime spree. My brother put the caramels back. He even showed that we never took the candy out of the store. But it was the INTENT that made it a crime, not the action. If a woman puts an ad out to have her husband whacked - no money needs to change hands. As soon as she says that she wants a person murdered, it's the intent that makes it a crime. What was the President's intent to withhold the funds? If he says, "Corruption," then there should be receipts to back that up. And we all know he has none.
  8. True that. I will admit, however - Doug Collins is a much better advocate for the president than Farmer Devin was, hahahahaha
  9. This guy says it best about the right to carry firearms: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2019/dec/09/houston-police-chief-criticises-politicians-and-nra-after-officer-death-video There's more to the 2nd amendment that people want to admit. And yes, I am a firearm owner myself.
  10. Well... 1. Because the Senate Majority leader has already stated that his goal is not to look at the case objectively (see appearance on Fox 'News' yesterday) 2. Because the House Republicans have yet to argue the facts of the case and are arguing process only. 3. Because if Senate/House Republicans were serious about their oaths, they'd be looking at this objectively and not in a partisan way.
  11. I don't even know why the House GOP is even fighting this. It's obviously going to die in the Senate trial, per Moscow Mitch. Why delay the inevitable?
  12. Yet ANOTHER roll call on an Amendment that was voted down.....again..... 23 Nos, 17 Ayes. And the Republicans yet again submit ANOTHER amendment. Trying to whack out the entire articles of Impeachment. That's like 3 or 4 times they've done that today.
  13. Sounds like he's got experience with....."the Hub...."?
  14. Because the GOPers behind the dais keep adding amendments to the original HR. They're using parliamentary rules to delay the inevitable, to say to the POTUS, "Hey I fought for you." If you want to see the actual text of the bill that they've been debating for two days now, here ya go: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/755/text?r=7&s=6 116th CONGRESS 1st Session H. RES. 755 Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES December 10, 2019 Mr. Nadler submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary RESOLUTION Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors. Resolved, That Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate: Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.
  15. Frankly, I am too. It's been "The Best Of...." from 45. Take your pick, but it's the Ukraine that will get him impeached. I'd have thought it would have been something else.
×
×
  • Create New...