Digest for rec.sport.football.college@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 11 topics

Monday, July 10, 2017

JGibson <james.m.gibson@gmail.com>: Jul 10 06:25PM -0700

http://www.yorkdispatch.com/story/sports/college/psu/football/2017/07/07/bob-shoop-says-he-fired-counterclaim-against-penn-state/457860001/
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Jul 10 03:45PM -0700

Hey look. A real news story about this. With details!
 
https://www.marketplace.org/amp/2017/07/10/tech/its-facebook-and-google-versus-newspaper-army
 
Interestingly the Murdoch owned WSJ is part of this alliance. So why didn't the article include Murdoch in this list of handout begging billionaires? This is a far bigger business for Murdoch than the Buffalo News is for Buffet.
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 10 05:48PM -0700

Not sure.
 
Not sure how it changes anything.
"Damon Hynes, Cyclone Ranger" <damonhynes@gmail.com>: Jul 10 05:54PM -0700

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 5:45:20 PM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
> Hey look. A real news story about this. With details!
 
> https://www.marketplace.org/amp/2017/07/10/tech/its-facebook-and-google-versus-newspaper-army
 
> Interestingly the Murdoch owned WSJ is part of this alliance. So why didn't the article include Murdoch in this list of handout begging billionaires? This is a far bigger business for Murdoch than the Buffalo News is for Buffet.
 
You mean the lower-case-conservative (on this side of the pond) Murdoch? The WSJ is pure crap since he took over.
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 10 03:16PM -0700

In a bean field, lotsa flames
plaidmoon@gmail.com: Jul 10 04:25PM -0700

> In a bean field, lotsa flames
 
I'm not seeing anything about it on any of the news websites. I guess that means Obamacare, Russian lawyers and European political figures weren't on board.
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 10 05:53PM -0700

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/dead-military-transport-plane-crashes-mississippi-article-1.3316027
"wolfie" <bgbdwolf@gte.net>: Jul 10 04:51PM -0400

"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" wrote
 
> A Russian lawyer is an agent of the Russian govt?
 
This one is.
 
> The DNC is the US Govt?
 
Who said "Govt?"
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 10 03:22PM -0700

I assumed you did. Maybe when you used the term espionage, you meant it in the classic sense and not in regard to a government.
 
I'm that case, yeah, as you say, nothing burger.
Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org>: Jul 10 06:24PM -0400

On 7/10/2017 4:14 PM, wolfie wrote:
> actively engaged in espionage against the US in order
> to get the results of that espionage is a nothingburger?
> Amazing how the right has come to embrace treason.
 
You mean the treason committed by HRC?
Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan): Jul 10 10:38PM

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:00:09 -0700 (PDT), xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>
wrote:
 
>He just confirmed that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. Which everyone who doesn't have partisan blinders on already knew, but it's harder to deny when the president's own son confirms it.
 
Guaranteeing a win for the conservatives - it doesn't get any more
patriotic than that.
 
Hugh
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
"wolfie" <bgbdwolf@gte.net>: Jul 10 07:16PM -0400

"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" wrote
 
> Maybe when you used the term espionage, you
> meant it in the classic sense and not in regard
> to a government.
 
What would you call an effort by a foreign
government's intelligence organization to
break into a company's corporate network
in order to steal information. Like, say,
trying to obtain missile guidance software?
 
> I'm that case, yeah, as you say, nothing burger.
 
As I said, "Amazing how the right has come to
embrace treason." Even the banana republics
used to get all upset when the CIA used to do it.
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 10 05:47PM -0700

HAY EVURBOTTY!!!
 
WE'RE HAVING A TREASON EMBRACING PARTY OVER HERE!!!
 
COME JOIN US!!
Tonawanda Kardex <tonawandakardex@gmail.com>: Jul 10 05:45PM -0700


> You're out of practice.
 
> This isn't even a bare shiny hook.
 
I'll work on getting rid of the rust.
dotslashderek@gmail.com: Jul 10 03:41PM -0700

Doing their thing:
 
"More messages referenced crematoriums and said she should have died in the Holocaust.
 
A tweet to her 12-year-old son had an image of an oven with the message: "PSsst kid there is a free X-box inside this oven.""
 
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/10/us/avalanche-of-hate-daily-stormer-lawsuit/index.html
 
I guess what surprises me is that there are so many folks that still act / think like this. Thought we were waaaay past it.
 
Cheers.
tim.vanwagonerspam@gmail.com: Jul 10 03:13PM -0700

In other words Connie, you got owned. You're arguing about something you know absolutely nothing about against someone who does this for a living. And because reality doesn't fit your narrow worldview, it's me that knows nothing about economics.
 
Please go back to schooling me on how efficiency doesn't require any research. That's a classic. Then again, your argument was so ridiculous that perhaps I'm being trolled and should take the hook out now.
Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan): Jul 10 10:15PM

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 09:27:26 -0700 (PDT), TimV
 
>---
>This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>http://www.avg.com
 
You certainly post some intelligent views on the issue. The medical
service provided me, if provided my dad, would have allowed him to
live more than 63 years - and my mom might have survived her hip
surgery.
 
When I retired the company I worked for had retiree insurance almost
identical to Medicare. Medicare in effect usurped it, i. e. why pay
for it if the government will. Why? Because it costs a helluva lot
more when government is involved. Why? Everyone is viewed as the same
person - retirees of the company I worked for were pretty special
compared to the same mold people covered by government insurance. If
some could not qualify to work at the company I did it's not the duty
of the government to interfere.
 
Aside from being more costly my basis is that the government should
not be involved in more thatn guaranteeing equal opportunity other
than establishing some basic standards for care. Government should not
handicap a people race like a horse race.
 
Out of curiosity where were you during the 30s and 40s to observe
people dying solely because they did not have health care insurance? I
did not know many people who even had health insurance.
 
Hugh
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 10 03:20PM -0700

Medicare is spending less on patients than private insurance?
 
No shit?
 
Ain't that something?
 
We should all aspire to be covered by Medicare.
tim.vanwagonerspam@gmail.com: Jul 10 03:27PM -0700

You all have been 'to a dentist and vet lately right? Those aren't exactly two great examples of business holding down prices for the consumer. Thus the proliferation of dental and pet insurance. And last I looked, the average cost of Lasix was a third of the US price in Canada.
 
Even the supposedly more free market medical service, including vet services, suffer from the high medical inflation and costs. We are seeing that spread even through the allied health fields. Everybody wants to get paid.
Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan): Jul 10 10:39PM

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:20:48 -0700 (PDT), "the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com"
 
>No shit?
 
>Ain't that something?
 
>We should all aspire to be covered by Medicare.
 
It means you would not have to look at grass from the root side for a
while yet.
 
Hugh
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan): Jul 10 10:27PM

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 07:05:58 -0700 (PDT), michael anderson
>ty for driving too fast and having an accident. A smoker who gets cancer? =
>Sorry, no treatment...gotta pay the penalty for smoking. And on and on and =
>on....
 
I would have little if any problem with that - but that was not the
issue of this thread.
 
Hugh
dotslashderek@gmail.com: Jul 10 03:32PM -0700

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 12:23:53 PM UTC-5, Ken Olson wrote:
 
> > Can't say I agree or disagree since I never was really into that scene. But it's an interesting perspective from someone who knows more about it than I do.
 
> Stronger equals using less and taking fewer of the bad components of the
> smoke into your lungs.
 
 
Exactly. One / two tokes instead of a giant spliff.
 
The issue is folks that don't realize the strength - have heard many stories, going back many years - started hearing them out of Amsterdam - around folks overdoing things (seems to mostly come from edibles - I think it'd be tough to smoke yourself to that state).
 
Cheers.
dotslashderek@gmail.com: Jul 10 03:29PM -0700

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 3:21:53 PM UTC-5, wolfie wrote:
 
> You prefer your news from state-sanctioned
> organizations? Khorosho dlya vas, tovarishch!
> Vy ne budete otpravleny v Sibir' segodnya.
 
 
Dude, they've been trying to take down the "lamestream media" since Rush hit the AM airways. Gotta let em have their "It's happening! It's happening!" moment...
 
Cheers.
Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan): Jul 10 10:24PM

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:53:29 -0700 (PDT), Eric Ramon
>> zero to do with his ability to be president.
 
>similarly whatever info is in the voter data has nothing to do with the cap=
>ability of those people to actually vote.
 
I don't care whether my voter info is furnished - I have nothing to
hide However I would suppose the request is to attempt to determine
voter fraud. The problem is that the info will be used for biased
purposes and I would not agree to that by any party.
> registered, which elections they voted in, whether they voted at the polli=
>ng stations or by absentee ballot....that sort of thing. What else does the=
> administration want?
 
You spoke to a different issue than the one I addressed - what
worthwhile purpose would be served by Trump furnishing his tax data?
 
Hugh
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com>: Jul 10 11:34AM -0700

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 9:59:26 AM UTC-5, Michael Press wrote:
 
> > or accurately anticipating a bad argument
 
> Once again: poisoning the well.
> W-L is an accurate metric along with all the other statistics.
 
W-L is an accurate metric in the sense that it accurately tells us how many times a pitcher was given a 'win' or 'loss' according to the way baseball rules tabulates such things.
 
It doesn't particularly tell us a great deal(relative to other metrics) about how effective a pitcher was or how much value he brought to the team.
 
That's why making a big deal out of W-L record is a bad argument.
 
 
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.football.college+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment