gehringer_2

Why not both?

That arm chair argument simple does not hold up in reality. Australia was very successful at getting illegal guns out of their society. Illegal guns have lots of avenues of removal. The police confiscate millions every year - without the legal trade resupplying the pipeline the illegal supply dries up as well. That is historical fact - not armchair theorizing.

so just for the sake of argument let's say Edvinsson is becoming all his boosters say he is - could he be in Det by '22? '23?

I beg to differ. Talk is cheap. If you are not willing to DO something to change the availability of guns then by definition are ARE OK with school shootings. You can make all the utopian noises you want about things that can never happen in practice: perfect law enforcement, perfect mental health support - and it's all garbage because we all know its just a deflection since none of those 'perfects' can or will ever happen. That's reality. The rest is bullshit. Rob is exactly correct.

Lynn Henning has Mel Tucker shipped off to LSU in his last column, but he says MSU fans shouldn't worry because MSU is bound to hire another coach just as good. OK Lynn! https://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/college/michigan-state-university/2021/10/18/as-talk-mel-tucker-lsu-heats-up-msu-should-not-panic/8510234002/

so now we know a little bit of what Cortez's men must have felt after he burned his ships.

yeah - looks like you needn't have bothered with your cleanup. Sic transit and all that. If the old servers hadn't been moved to the cloud maybe we could mount a second story job on the harddrives?

could be. I was more Repub than Dem in those days and I don't remember people being enthused about Dole at all. He was viewed a bit like Biden was going into 2020. Now maybe that was a Michigan thing, where we had a liberal GOP history to begin with (ie. Romney/Milliken/Griffin) and Dole's support was stronger elsewhere.

that 's at least the 2nd DP he's booted in the playoffs.

yeah - I also think it was his in a walk if he wanted it. I suppose he might have made some terrible faux pas discussing domestic policy but it just seems unlikely. But he didn't want it, and the truth is that if you don't at least want it, you probably won't be very good at it. Sure there are periods when a 'caretaker' like Eisenhower can be judged relatively successful, but if you don't have an agenda to do something positive that drives you to want the office, you probably won't accomplish much. One think is for certain, the GOP would be a different party if Powell had been its next president instead of "W." Even if GWB personally isn't part of what his party has become, his political fecklessness is what let the people who took it over do so.

Sure, it can happen, but a lot of things have to go right to get a top QB outside the top 5. I think the better question is whether in a year that the top performing BCS teams don't have a QB the gets the spotlight as a top choice, there isn't a still a top QB out there laboring with a team not good enough for his profile to rise to 'obvious'. Of course ironically that is the guy you are likely to get with a lower pick as well.

LOL - I just brought up gameday to check the score and thought - '"gee - a close game, maybe I'll watch" and then Schwarber 'unclosed' it.

practicing the piano was one of my all time fav's - esp since I was a reel-to-reel tape nerd at that age myself. No piano lessons though....

What's the way out of the conundrum? If you don't stink you don't get a pick high enough to insure you get a top QB prospect. If you wait until the QB is the last piece you need you are probably too good to be able to draft him. I'm not trying to be smart ass here but I don't see how you make passing on a QB when you have a top 1-3 pick work unless the plan is to be winless two years in a row. 🤮

and - He doesn't care if there is a fascist takeover as long as they book at Mar-a-lago and let him have the White House back again.

you wonder he can still find lawyers willing to take on his cases.

yeah - "Sprained" is a pretty broad diagnosis applied to an ankle.

I guess it's true that there has always been a tension among Canadians themselves whether hockey is supposed to be a skill game or just WWE on skates.

so there is a Hallmark card shop in the Kroger mall in west A^2. Staffed almost wholey by little old ladies. They are now selling CBD oil. Sorry but that just cracks me up.

IIRC there were some posters here (well at the old 'here') that used to be host families in Lakeland.

I wonder. Do you suppose it's because the league is so over-expanded with respect to the talent base feeding it that the only way to establish even a reasonable facsimile of parity across the league is to allow players to remain who make their living by abusing the other teams players instead of playing a skilled game?

HaHa - another "better to be lucky than good" outcome. Good for you 1

I'm not going to speak to cases not in evidence, besides which there are whack jobs on all sides - but unless your definition of 'a lot' of democrats is really "a handful of idiots" your implication is hardly justified. The question of which party is continually seen keeping the company of known white nationalists and xenophobes of other various descriptions is not open to serious debate.

the choice for mutual funds vs direct investing has changed a lot in recent years. Not too long ago it was expensive to buy stock in lots of less than 100 shares, and since you need to own maybe a dozen or maybe even 20 (depending on your taste) individual stocks to meet your diversification tolerance, it was less expensive for smaller investors to use mutual funds even if they had the inclination to do their own stock picking. Today, stock purchase commissions are tiny and odd lot penalties are a thing of the past, so the value of mutual funds for 'active' small investors is much smaller than it used to be. Now in theory, if you don't want to do a lot of research, it should be easier to find a mutual fund that matches your objectives and performs to your demands than to pick individual stocks, but again, the context has changed a lot. When I started investing there were a lot fewer reasonable mutual funds to choose from than there were stocks. Today I'd wager there are more mutual funds and ETFs to research than there are stocks to pick so the question becomes - why bother with the middle man? I wouldn't tell anyone to avoid ETFs or mutual funds, as long as their charges are low, they are fine. I would just say the small investor "needs" them less than they used to. Or at least the amount of money you are managing before being comfortable with a transition to individual stock picking is much lower.

It's not even original to Atlanta - they appropriated it from FSU.