jerryskids

It seems like the SCOTUS is merely deciding whether Ohio should take the case, not deciding the case itself. In doing so they may rule on the legality of the law in Ohio and 19 other states + DC that the plaintiff must show a historical pattern of discrimination against their class, which is, um, challenging for straight white folks.

@BiffTannen, moving the driver discussion here. My son just bought a used driver, but I have no idea what. I'm hitting balls with him tomorrow, I'll find out then. Basically he needs a stiff shaft, maybe extra stiff. He bought his starter Callaway set from Costco last year; I suggested he get the stiff shafts online, but he ignored me since I'm his father and bought the regular shafts they had in the store. Our instructor told him he swings way too hard for such a shaft, and suggested a few older clubs which he feels compare nicely to newer technology. One of them was the Ping G400, from 2017 I think. I stumbled on one at a PGA Superstore last week killing time between appointments and hit it; I thought it was OK, not nearly as nice as the used TaylorMade QI10s they had next to the bay. I can't say I've ever really hit Titleist clubs, so I'll be interested in your opinion.

He only ruled against the TRO. I suspect the AP will win this one. Trump and/or the press secretary can always just not call on them.

What makes you think they won't be vetted?

Looks like a bunch of Lefties fell for fake news.

Maybe I'll buy a new driver on Friday.

Goodnight, Forrest.

I've barely posted in hours. I've also been on this site 20+ years and made a bunch of friends, many whom I've met and others I've chatted with extensively online. You have no social skills or, as near as I can tell, any redeeming social qualities. I'd be amazed if you have any close friends IRL. I'm guessing you are pretty high up the autism scale. Whatever, I don't care, just please recognize the slightest of social cues and stop being an ass in threads that aren't political. Such threads are what keep people, other than you, coming back here. TIA!

Agreed. I didn't recognize the name until it came up in a thread today that she was fired, and some guys here didn't find her attractive. I googled her and recognized her. Definitely an exotic look that I find hot.

Will you just delete your account already? We're trying to have a non-partisan adult discussion here. TIA

That's an interesting point. But apparently, it's not so easy, or else everyone would do it.

Fnord, I hope you know I like you as a poster and appreciate your comments, as I do @The Real timschochet. It's much better than TrollGay or the Girlfriend, let alone Tebok/Rusty, who just troll 24/7. To that end I've bolded and numbered points in your post: (1) Not sure where you are going here. I've pointed out the attempted dehumanization of such terms to avoid discussing the issues, yet you combine them. Unelected? Nobody running any executive department is elected, as I've pointed out. Billionaire? What's the relevance? Are you afraid that a guy worth roughly $393B is going to sell your SSN on the SSN black market to... what end exactly? (2) Elon long ago posted the meme of how he was center-left, but the Overton Window moved so far Left that he looked like a far Rightie. Other true liberal folks like Bill Maher, Joe Rogan, and Bari Weiss have experienced the same. (3) This made me say whoa... I would be apoplectic if Soros were in this position! But then I thought of my point #2 above, and the fact that Soros has spent decades trying to destroy the fabric of our culture. Still, I acknowledge your concern. (4) That seems like a distinction without a difference. You added "alleged"? OK, but it was in the context of dehumanizing labels to Musk. (5) I'm aware that I have partisan assumptions, and that I don't come across as objective. I originally opposed Trump, favoring DeSantis. But, he failed, and here we are. I find myself in the position of responding to Leftie comments like "unelected billionaire" and responding like #1 above. Unconstitutional? Well, if so, I oppose it, and I presume that somebody has filed or will file a suit regarding the specifics. It's not like there aren't thousands or millions of government employee second-handers itching to be the poster child for such lawsuits. Until then, it sounds like sky screaming TDS to me. (6) Feel free to point out an example, including my opposition if possible, but not necessary.

I feel like I remember the helicopter taking Nixon after his resignation. That was 1974, so I was 7.

Agreed, I was thinking it is a different dynamic.

I agree. I think Musk went a little too far over his skis on this one, and had to be pulled back. You don't know where the line is if you don't cross it I guess. Thankfully it wasn't anything serious. Although you wouldn't know it from the MDS folks here. Like... ... guy who once again didn't get the point of a post. This is reason 4321324 why having a serious discussion with you is impossible. Also, you have like 25 posts already this morning. Maybe you should check in on your fake finance exec job, and let the adults talk for a while.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/markgurman_apple-will-add-20000-us-jobs-amid-threat-activity-7299749880028110849-oyXY?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAADSC1cBmLiSjJ8vjSK477dCaW3jDBwRYF0 More winning.

I dunno, when I see it, I wonder if the defense will be able to stop it. I have no dog in this fight because my team (Cardinals) has an Oompa Loompa at QB, so we'll never do it. And it seems like sour grapes from teams that don't have a QB who can squat 600 pounds. But I do find it funny that the NFL pretends to care about QB safety, and yet allow this type of play. Also, there are other plays where the NFL outlaws similar assistance that don't involve QBs (defense jumping on lineman to block a kick, for instance). It will end when somebody throws an elbow at Hurts' head and knocks him out. Then the NFL will cry "my QB safety$#@!"

I'm more lazy than cheap, plus I had been toying with joining a club and signing up through there. Finally said fock it and just joined the E-club.

This post spurred me to finally join GHIN. My main golf buddy has been bugging me to do it for a while.

Umm, I read it and quoted from it multiple times in multiple posts. Great job typing word salad and not addressing my points. I'll let you diarrhea on the screen until you do. Bummer about your team being so rudderless, tho. They need a strong leader like yourself actively engaged.

I think it is funny that you are a borderline ratarded and call me pudding head. I guess it is consistent with the fantasy pretend finance exec world you live in. LinkedIn was an excerpt of the article, from the writer at Bloomberg. I'm sure you missed it since it was in bold, 36 point font, but the headline of the article: It also happened shortly after Cook met with Trump: Bloomberg seems to think Trump influenced this new, higher investment. You don't though. I'm sure you are right. This might be a good time to take a break from the internet, and reach out to your vast team to see how things are going in your empire within the billion dollar healthcare-adjacent company.

Perhaps you missed my biotch-slapping the "non-elected" trope a week or two ago, but: tell me who you voted for to head Treasury? Any cabinet position? Oh yeah, those aren't elected positions. And yet, the MSDNC filled the Leftist hive mind with "non-elected$#@!" and the usual cast of characters were here beating that drum. I don't recall specifically if you were in that group. Regarding the constitution, when Trump violates it, it should be resolved. For now I've seen things like "he's pausing payments" which, too my knowledge, is not unconstitutional. Accusations of making cuts so deep that they are tantamount to eliminating departments is a valid discussion, but it is a complex situation which needs to be adjudicated. I see you ignored the "neo-Nazi!" point from your previous post. As Scott Adams once said, you and I are watching different movies. I could confidently rewrite your second paragraph regarding the Leftist hive following its marching orders. That's how this sub-topic started: MDC crying "billionaire" just because it's been seared into his brain. Your last paragraph, I could easily replace "will" with "won't." Right: Look at all these USAID boondoggles. Left: Young engineers! Racist posts! Right: There are trillions of dollars unaccounted for in Treasury spending. Left: Unelected! Unconstitutional! Musk is worth $393B and he's going to sell my info on the CEO/billionaire black market! I just don't think we can have a discussion on this. I've disagreed with things they are doing, but when you enter a conversation with "neo-nazi," I don't view it as a serious discussion.

So you changed from white flag to saying I'm right, and you'll move on to the next distraction from the MSM. A person of Musk's stature, with a company that launches rockets, is inevitably going to run into some perceived conflicts of interest. When he uses your and TrailGuy's retirement funds to cut himself a check, let me know. If you need another, here is one. Neo nazi! Young engineer posted racist stuff! Constitution! Not elected! Billionaire!

They've committed to investment over the next five years, at a higher rate than they had been doing. This is on top of their past investments. Sorry you hate more and increased investment in the United States. Then again you don't care about our country's success; it's all about your TDS.

Great point. I posted a LinkedIn article from the Managing Editor and Chief Correspondent on Apple + Tech at Bloomberg News and TV who thought it was important enough to post, and you are a pretend finance exec who spends all day spouting TDS nonsense on a lightly-trafficked FF board.