Plenty of tasty morsels to get you through the afternoon:
- Obama administration toughens Title IX rules. My bullshit meter started clicking furiously with this quote from Neena Chaudhry, senior counsel for the National Women’s Law Center: “There aren’t any statistics to show opportunities for women were denied, but Chaudhry suggested it was a possibility.”
- “Keep in mind: Tim Tebow carried the ball 217 times last year, more than twice the amount of any Gators running back.”
- This BCS story has it all: unnamed sources about an unnamed company, citing an unseen study about which schools are “the best candidates to become part of the BCS”. Well, all except for any shred of professional journalism.
- “Speaking of first-rounders, anybody want to venture a guess on which SEC team produced the most during the past decade?”
- Shakin the Southland looks at Cover 3 pattern reads.
- “At wide receiver, non-BCS athletes have better NFL careers than a BCS athlete with similar college stats and similar performances at the NFL Scouting Combine.” They just don’t go as high in the NFL draft.
- More Vance Cuff love.
- One of these numbers isn’t like the others.
Get The Picture 
“Speaking of first-rounders, anybody want to venture a guess on which SEC team produced the most during the past decade?”
you should also take note of the most 1st overall picks all time (SEC)
LikeLike
Anyone reading those spring game attendance numbers as a gauge of excitement surrounding a program? I am. Check out LSU’s attendance. That must be very low for them.
LikeLike
“One of these numbers isn’t like the others.”
Vanderbilt: Once again in preparation for Rites of Spring, just as last year and the year before, today’s overwhelming winner of the spring game attendance number closest to 420.
One teabagger urban sombrero –
and two –
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheToyesMusic
LikeLike
I have no idea how good UF’s running backs are – how could you possibly know? But more and more, Teebs’ rushing stats make me think a team should take a chance on him. I know how bad his delivery is, and that he won’t be able to rush in the NFL like he did in college, etc., but with the NFL rules he might rush better: there are heavily enforced rules about contact of a QB and until he passes the line of scrimmage I think they are still enforced. Teebs might be able to play both ends against the middle and make out like a bandit.
LikeLike
UF’s running backs are very small and very fast. They will break long runs occasionally if they can get in the open, but none of them – with the possible exception of Emmanuel Moody – will escape tackles. There’s hope that freshman Mack Brown will change this.
LikeLike
I thought Gillislee is the big hope for that this year.
LikeLike
You’re correct. They are extremely high on Gillislee as being the tackle-breaker they need.
LikeLike
I like Gillislee – his hometown is about 15 miles from where I currently reside, but I think he fits the description I already provided: he doesn’t break many tackles. He picked up 50 yards on 10 carries in the Spring game with 24 yards coming on one carry, so he averaged 2.9 yards per carry on the other 9 attempts – not very impressive. Moody is better, but he has trouble staying healthy.
Prediction: 5-star RB James Wilder will sign with and play for Georgia Tech.
LikeLike
I’d have gone with “Two of these numbers are not like the others.”
Alabama is further out in front of #2 than Vandy is behind #9 (11) in sheer numbers.
One typical Democrat urban floatation device –
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&tbs=isch:1&q=gay+pride+parade+san+francisco&sa=N&start=84&ndsp=21
Two –
LikeLike
Seem a bit homophobic
Got anything to get off your chest?
LikeLike
I don’t think my friend Phocion is scared or frightened of deranged queers. Just a bit sick of their bullshit perhaps.
LikeLike
Jax, I take it you didn’t get the “there’s no bigotry on the right” memo.
LikeLike
Please. Bigotry exists on both sides so spare me the crap Senator. Your self-righteousness is sickening at times. Although I still think you’re a pretty good dude.
LikeLike
Something like 40% of Tea Party members are Democrats and moderates. But I am sure the all racists and homophobes are Republicans. 🙂
LikeLike
You honestly believe that? Conservative, please.
LikeLike
I think Martha Coakley and John Corzine could better answer that question for you!
LikeLike
How so? Please, lay it out for me.
And while you’re at it, maybe you can explain how the last six special elections for the House have all broken for the Dems… including the Florida district in which the Republican candidate ran on expressly opposing Obamacare.
LikeLike
Did somebody claim that the Tea Party movement was all powerful at the ballot box? I sure didn’t.
LikeLike
So what do Coakley and Corzine have to do with anything then?
Nice dodge.
LikeLike
It’s bad enough y’all had to rise to Dog in Fla’s truly flimsy bait, but really, was “durr hurr hurr faggots and welfare queens” the best you could do?
You embarrass yourselves.
LikeLike
Repeal “Don’t ask, don’t tell”!
LikeLike
‘truly flimsy bait’?
‘weak tea’ is what I prefer to call it.
Just like this:
A terrorist fist-bump goes out to each and every teabagger* everywhere!
For example, this Freedom Works sponsored astroturf movement effort keeps food on Dick Armey and his family…
http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2010/04/teabagging-negro-pics-teabagging-negro.html
We all should be thankful that corporate America is looking out for the best interest of all of the victimized straight and not-out-of the closet yet white men, and that term is used loosely, everywhere by arranging fun events where you can make your own sign or be provided with one.
* “The term’s growth in the political arena earned attention by the Oxford American Dictionary, and the word “teabagger” achieved finalist status for the OAD Word of the Year, with final judgment rendered thus:[15]
As a reference to members of the currently active Tea Party, the word has been used in speech and print by both liberals and conservatives. In this context, the term “teabagger” is a reasonably conceived informal name for an affiliate of the Tea Party, and as a word in the news, it earned a mention for the year 2009.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_bagger
LikeLike
I’m sure after reading this:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002961.html
you’ll have no problem whatsoever in using ‘redskin’.
LikeLike
Pretty sure the ‘welfare’ comment as posted was restricted to how the government uses its power to fund the program rather than any comment on who it gives the money to other than calling them ‘strangers’. But, hey, feel free to be overly sensitive in your defense.
LikeLike
Define homophobic please.
LikeLike
Nah…I just go the ‘fire with fire’ route in that one homophobic comment deserve another inkind. Fair’s fair, right?
LikeLike
Teabaggers of the World, Unite!
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/is-teabagger-an-epithet-rachel-maddow-teaches-a-tea-party-history-lesson/
LikeLike
I can’t believe that this was used as a legit reason-“Nancy Hogshead-Makar, a law professor and senior director for advocacy with the Women’s Sports Foundation, said female participation in sports is the most effective remedy against obesity and leads to more education and better employment prospects.”…Participate in a college sport to get rid of fat. That is a lame reason for men or women
LikeLike
Agree. As if women are generally too lazy to get off their asses on their own. No, Nancy the olympian is reaching on this one. More political correctness run amuck.
LikeLike
Maybe what Hogshead is trying to say is why settle for this
when you can have this
LikeLike
An Army of Trumans –
“Freed from the burden of any actual governing responsibility, the GOP has been free to devote all of its efforts to reconstructing their Bubble World. And they’ve been largely successful. An entire movement has formed that is based, almost entirely, on confusion and mis-directed anger, a movement that sees the world only through the lens of Fox News and other right wing outlets. The Tea Party is an army of Trumans, a movement of people who have whole-heartedly embraced the false reality with which they’ve been presented….What can we do to make facts once again relevant? What can be done to dis-incentivize the kind of lying and reality denial that has become the hallmark of the modern conservative movement? ”
http://www.anonymousliberal.com/
I still say tough love. That’s the way they like it…
LikeLike
Dog in Fla,
the first link is written by a liberal litigator (which is redundant) and therefore not worth much folk’s time.
But the second link is just plain fucking stupid. Attempting to make the connection to those in this country that desire less government and less taxes (and prefer the supply-side model which creates jobs, not stifle them) to someone that would prefer the Somalia model is the laziest, most asinine line of reasoning ever. It takes the debate to a level that is simply pitiful.
Government and taxes a part of life, but if you truly are someone that prefers the European model of a value-added-tax, a national tax, high personal tax rates, and a society where the majority are parasites living off the production of the minority then please leave these shores. You cannot honestly believe that the socialist European model is superior to ours, even with our flaws.
Take off your democratic hat and ask yourself if you truly want more government and higher taxes. I think guys like you and the Senator know the answer if your heart of hearts.
LikeLike
You want an idea of where the stupidity of all this liberal talk leads? Look no further than the very latest out of Europe and what European leadersnowwish to define as a ‘right’:
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2923469
Simply unbelievable.
*****
A question that Libs never want to answer these days is this…If America is going to become more Eurpean in the near future then who is going to be the next “America”? Who is going to serve the roll that America has for the past couple centuries?
LikeLike
Lord. Where to begin?
(1) Obama and the Democratic congress cut taxes for 95% of Americans. As a result, taxes are at their lowest level in 60 years. And 98% of Republican congressmen voted against the most recent tax cuts.
(2) Spending by the Federal Government under the Bush Administration went up 55% in 8 years (and that total doesn’t include the costs of Bush’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan). The GOP was in charge of the Congress during 6 1/2 of those 8 years, and were calling almost all of the shots with regard to the budget.
Yet somehow, despite this, you seem to believe the Dems are the ones who want ‘more government and higher taxes’? In what world?
What makes you think that Republicans want smaller government? Is it their desire to control women’s reproductive systems? The way they intervened in the Terry Schiavo situation? The draconian approach they have with regard to drugs? The disdain they have for the fourth amendment?
Bloody hell, Jon Kyl has a hold on 100 of Obama’s nominees in the Senate because he thinks the Federal Government isn’t being strict enough with regard to prohibitions on Internet Gambling. Do you actually think this clown is a champion of ‘small government’?
More than anything, you probably believe the GOP stands for ‘small government’ because they have been running around for years telling everyone it’s what they stand for, despite all evidence to the contrary. Apparently, you’d rather recite tired – and false – talking points than actually assess the evidence. Congratulations on proving Dog in Fla’s point.
LikeLike
I think you present good arguments but please realize that the 8 years of the Bush administration does not equal the history of the Republican party. A strong majority of conservatives want the Republican party to return to the conservative program of smaller government and fiscal restraint. I certainly do.
But what this country does not need, and what has conservatives in Mass, Virginia, and New Jersey (for example) worked-up is the activist mentality of the current administration. Obama has taken the trend of Bush and multiplied it by 100. Under the current spending measures (including entitlements such as this new Healthcare Act), we will be flat broke in the near future.
And to your point of cutting taxes of 95% of Americans….95% of Americans don’t pay taxes. Only about 55% of Americans pay taxes and of those, 10% pay 75% of the taxes. That’s my point about the European model – it’s fine if you want parasites living off the worker bees. But that’s not what made this country the most successful and wealthiest in history.
If you and Dog disgree with that, then please take your socialist mentality to Europe, or Somalia.
LikeLike
That’s not an accurate statement.
LikeLike
Senator,
I’ll see your liberal NYT article with one from the Heritage Society.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/04/Tax-Day-or-Payday-How-the-Tax-Code-Is-Expanding-Government-and-Dependency
Again, you continue to want to have it both ways.
Now I don’t “run a blog” and it’s time to get back to work. Goodbye for now.
LikeLike
Jax, you’ve missed the point. If you want to limit your argument to federal income taxes, you’re on firm ground. But when you talk about taxes generically, you’re not.
LikeLike
Smaller government polls well, which is why the GOP keeps acting like they support it. But Reagan and (the first) Bush did the same thing Bush II did – expand government like crazy, and run massive deficits. Meanwhile, under Clinton this trend was reversed. There’s just no reason to believe GOP claims about wanting smaller government, if you look at their record over the last 30 years.
For the record, Federal spending under Obama has gone up 25% in 2 years, most of which was a product of a 1-time expense, the Stimulus package. Once again, despite what the GOP alleges, he has not ‘taken the trend of Bush and multiplied it by 100.’
As far as the Health Care law goes, the status quo – i.e., the Republican plan – was going to bankrupt the country. The Health Care law implements numerous cost controls – yes, government spending goes up, but the net result is a benefit for our deficit. As opposed to us being ‘flat broke’, this law actually stops us from doing just that – providing more than $1 trillion in savings over the next 20 years. And need I mention that the entire (supposedly) fiscally responsible GOP voted against it? In fact, their alternatives (selling insurance across state lines, tort reform) would have had virtually no impact whatsoever on our deficit.
Finally, I should point out that Somalia is actually a libertarian’s paradise, not a socialist one. So maybe if you disagree with things like Social Security, Medicare, or FDA regulations, then please take your libertarian mentality there.
LikeLike
The best govt, in my opinion, is a republic where the congress and white house are controlled by separate parties, ie Clinton. It’s usually when one party dominates that you have problems – which is what we’ve seen with both parties. And go ahead and throw in Jimmy Carter if you’re going back to Reagan. As if you can compare the effectiveness of the two.
Obama has dramatically increased the pace of govt spending and CBO projections spell doomsday unless we make a “change”, to borrow from Barry. Do you actually believe inflation is not on the horizon? Do you know what the single biggest risk to our economy is? Just ask Volcker.
The Republicans had a plan, a more fiscally conservative plan, but Barry and Rahm wouldn’t listen. But the voters of liberal Massachusetts did, and awarded conservative Scott Brown the seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy – the father of socialist medicine! And what a way to pass such sweeping legislation – without ONE vote from the other party. And what’s Bart Stupak’s next gig? That was NOT the way Americans want their congress to behave and their will be a price to pay come 11/2/10.
And yes, interstate selection would make a tremendous difference in healthcare costs due to the often expensive individual mandates placed on statewide policy holders. I’d love to purchase a policy from California and not have the expensive Florida mandate of having to insure myself against lung cancer when I don’t smoke.
And you must a personal injury attorney to suggest Tort reform would be meaningless. Are you on the back of the phonebook? Dog bite? 1-800-I-Sue-You?
And you reinforce my original point re Somalia. It’s a fucking stupid example. But it’s more of a rogue dictatorship than a “libertarian paradise”.
I’m out. I have to pay some taxes for the parasites that don’t.
LikeLike
Translation: elections have consequences only when Republicans are in office. 😉
LikeLike
No, we need more balance in Washington and I believe we’ll get that this November. The beauty of our republic is that congress can control the true power, which should be derived from the will of the people. And I think the collective will of this country is to reign in this activist administration.
Jesus this country could be fucking bad ass again if we could find someone to govern down the middle, which is what Barry promised but hasn’t delivered. There will be a price to pay.
LikeLike
Thank goodness somebody is working so that parasites everywhere may enjoy Earth Day…
http://pourmecoffee.posterous.com/predicting-sarah-palin-earth-day-tweet-closes
LikeLike
Obviously, we will just have to agree to disagree.
But one thing bears mentioning – Barry and Rahm wouldn’t listen to the GOP alternative because the GOP plan was a bit of a joke. Here it is: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10705/hr3962amendmentBoehner.pdf
To summarize, it covered 3 million uninsured and saved $68 million over 10 years as opposed to the Dem plan, which covered 32 million uninsured and saved $104 million over 10 years.
I am trying to wrap my head around how covering less people and saving less money constitutes a better plan.
And you’ll note the net result of your beloved tort reform is cost savings of $4.1 billion/year. That won’t help, I’m afraid.
LikeLike
Barry, Rahm, and Nancy didn’t like it b/c it didn’t extend a handout or entitlement to cover a certain sect of their voting base.
But hey, at least Fidel Castro approves of our new plan.
LikeLike
Well, actually, I’m guessing they didn’t like it because it was a total joke that covered less people and saved less money than the Democratic plan.
Are you going to sit there and say with a straight face that the GOP plan was better than the Dem plan? I mean, come on – it was such an embarrassment that even the GOP didn’t publicize it.
Admittedly, though, given that the only domestic policy ideas the GOP has had for the last 30 years are more tax cuts, increased federal spending, and less regulation, they are at a bit of a disadvantage when it comes to addressing serious issues.
LikeLike