Big body who can pound it down low.

This looks like a guy who will only be able to guard the 5 spot in the Big East. 4s in the Big East will be considerably more athletic/explosive

ivyhillparkk1963 said:

A little drew timme comes to mind with an outside stroke..

Click to expand...

Bigger too

I used to try to look that mad when i yelled at my kids when they were little. Rarely succeeded.

Where have you gone... Frank Ryan, Jim Brown, Paul Warfield and Lou the Toe Groza?

PiratePride said:

look.... I agree with you that Trump did not handle that right.... but MY point is that "some" posters overstate Trump's errors... if you said almost two weeks, I would have no problem.... that would have been accurate..... but "for weeks" leaves it open to readers' imagination.... and was actually incorrect ..... possibly purposefully.... am I wrong?

Click to expand...

I mean, yeah. 12 days not commenting on that from POTUS is not a good look already.

I didn’t have the exact number of days off hand so I said weeks. I don’t think that changes anything and wasn’t trying to overstate it.

Come on John, tell us how you really feel----

A little drew timme comes to mind with an outside stroke..

Nice

Wow, that's a loss for media.

Merge said:

The point was that he was also asked about the attack a couple times and walked away without any public comments on it for 12 days.
2 days under "weeks" is still not a good look.

It was weak of Walz to walk away from the question. I just think if that moment is weighing in on how you will vote, then you're ignoring the character of Trump who did something very similar. I think there are much better policy arguments to support a vote for Trump instead of getting into character.

Click to expand...

look.... I agree with you that Trump did not handle that right.... but MY point is that "some" posters overstate Trump's errors... if you said almost two weeks, I would have no problem.... that would have been accurate..... but "for weeks" leaves it open to readers' imagination.... and was actually incorrect ..... possibly purposefully.... am I wrong?

Looks like he broke the camera at the 57 second mark.

Merge said:

Not arguing that.

According to the study, sugar drinks good are good for depression but sugar snacks are bad.
This sugar in a cookie will make you depressed but the same sugar in a drink will reduce your risk. That doesn't really make sense.

All I am saying is that the study seems to be correlational rather than causational.

Seeing that depressed people were more likely to consume diet drinks doesn't necessarily prove that the drinks caused the depression.

Click to expand...

the people who did the study disagree.....

But the authors disagree. Prof Andrew T Chan, chief of the clinical and translational epidemiology unit at Massachusetts general hospital and co-author of the research, said: “The strength of our study is that we were able to assess diet several years before the onset of depression. This minimises the likelihood that our findings are simply due to individuals with depression being more likely to choose ultra-processed foods.”

There's tons of studies going between ultra processed food, artificial sweeteners and their link with mental health. People like Prof Chan believe they have something while I bet the food lobby will keep things down.

I believe Frank the Tank has cornered the market on these rants.

PiratePride said:

It was 12 days before he himself addressed it publicly..... big difference than "for weeks". I got that from an LA Times report back in 2017.

Click to expand...

The point was that he was also asked about the attack a couple times and walked away without any public comments on it for 12 days.
2 days under "weeks" is still not a good look.

It was weak of Walz to walk away from the question. I just think if that moment is weighing in on how you will vote, then you're ignoring the character of Trump who did something very similar. I think there are much better policy arguments to support a vote for Trump instead of getting into character.

Merge said:

Not hostages, but service members ambushed in Niger He didn’t comment on that for weeks and ignored a reporters ask for comments on it.

Click to expand...

I agree that he should have addressed it immediately. He had his press secretary read the comments that he was supposed to deliver the next day. Sounded like a secret type mission gone awry.... but still. He did call the parents of the deceased and a report told about at least one of the parents who were appreciative of the call. It was 12 days before he himself addressed it publicly..... big difference than "for weeks". I got that from an LA Times report back in 2017.

PiratePride said:

The criticism of Trump in the report was that he did not include the Afghans in the negotiations. I get that criticism. Would like to know how that came about. But a valid criticism.

So....... why did Biden continue to leave the Afghans out of the loop?

The report pointed out that Biden just ignored the conditions that were set by Trump in the agreement. He wanted out and he made one of the most disastrous foreign affairs / military decision ever. He was more concerned with optics than reason.

Be prepared for more of the same if Harris gets elected. "The last person in the room"

Click to expand...

I have no issue with being critical of Biden (and Harris) about how poorly the withdrawal went.
I don't place much of the blame on Trump because it was not his decision at that point and Biden did not need to follow the plan if it didn't make sense.

Only thing I tend to disagree with is thinking that it would have been better under a 2nd term of Trump. The Taliban got more aggressive as our deadline to leave was approaching. Does that not happen under Trump? Maybe Trump would have responded to the Taliban more aggressively. Maybe that would have resulted in a better outcome, or maybe it would have been worse or maybe we would still be there.

None of us really know anything but it is easy to see it was chaotic, and I wish Biden and Harris were more compassionate towards the gold star families.

SHUHoopsFan said:

Watched a documentary on insulin resistance and sugar isn’t the problem. Cells are designed to process glucose. But when the cells are so clogged with fats they can’t absorb the glucose.

It’s not about the sugar. It’s about the chemical additives and preservatives. The more chemicals which Diet Coke has more than regular coke the more it’s a problem for the human body.

Click to expand...

Not arguing that.

According to the study, sugar drinks good are good for depression but sugar snacks are bad.
This sugar in a cookie will make you depressed but the same sugar in a drink will reduce your risk. That doesn't really make sense.

All I am saying is that the study seems to be correlational rather than causational.

Seeing that depressed people were more likely to consume diet drinks doesn't necessarily prove that the drinks caused the depression.