DrunkBomber

Ill miss Jo when hes gone.

Ive probably seen National Treasure more than any other movie and not even because its anywhere near my favorite movie, it is just on tv a lot and is an easy movie to jump into at any point. Ive also seen a ton of Independence Day and Goodfellas, but Id imagine at least Goodfellas has to be on a lot of peoples most watched list.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jan 8, 2016 -> 03:45 PM) This thread needs more Con Air. I used to know how to embed

A lot of mine have been mentioned already however hands down, my favorite movie is The Wolf of Wall Street. I didnt notice if anyone had mentioned Forrest Gump but thats up there for me as well. Give me Demolition Man and Rocky 4 for my Stallone fix.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 11:42 AM) Peyton Manning to start the Broncos' divisional playoff game. I can't say I agree with that move. Brock didnt do himself any favors in that last San Diego game. He was choking against a brutal defense in a game that they needed to win. If they lost that game theyd go from the number 1 seed to the 5 seed. Ill be curious to see what they do moving forward.

Sad to hear Peanut tore his acl and will miss the playoffs. Hopefully, if he decides to retire he signs a one day contract to retire as a Bear.

If you dont use the # it doesnt count

Well that definition seals the deal that #blacklivesmatter is without a doubt a terrorist organization.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Dec 27, 2015 -> 03:28 PM) Didn't realize it was Lovie who fumbled twice, threw the stupid INT that took away 3 points and grabbed the face mask to take away a turnover. Besides Kwon Alexander, the Bucs have neglected the defensive side of the ball in the last two drafts. They've fixed the OL, drafted a franchise QB, drafted Evans and Simms. ASJ might be a player if he stays healthy. Now Sign a WR and fix the defense through the draft and keep building. Ya, signing a wr will probably make Lovie figure out offense.

Lol at Tampa. Get used to those types of games with Lovie in town.

Die Hard

Imo this season has gone pretty well for the Bears. They proved they can compete with teams despite being less talented than most of the teams they played. They had some nice wins vs Kc and GB and some close losses other games that could have went either way. Who knows, maybe s***ting the bed at the end of the season will allow us to keep Gase as well. We are looking like we should have a decent draft pick now and we will have a lot of money for FA. For what my expectations were going into this season I cant really complain with how its went.

This one is really bad. *Graphic* http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/vide...2858ukJMVFxI4oG

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 20, 2015 -> 09:16 PM) But we haven't enacted a similar policy towards militia groups on native soil, especially in the heart of the 1990's when you had a series of events including Ruby Ridge, Timothy McVeigh/OKC bombing and the Branch Davidian/David Koresh stand-off in WACO. Most of these "attacks" have involved white males in terms of mass shootings, militia groups or religious sects...and probably the second highest demographic representation after white males would be Asian males, and they're hardly subject to any extra scrutiny, either. I agree another massive event (somewhere between 9/11 and Paris) will tip the balance all around the world...but, at this point, we're at a time where enacting such a policy would only increase the number of attacks and terrorist recruiting around the world. The most difficult question is how much is the US responsible for terrorist attacks against our allies when they're simply much more convenient targets in terms of geographic proximity and looser border controls (Schengen Agreement)...? Clinton tried to make that argument against Trump already, that he's making the world MORE dangerous, not less, by pandering to the base during primary season when 90% of his proposals are completely unrealistic or downright unconstitutional. But you didnt ask about any of that, you asked about Italians, Germans and Japanese.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 20, 2015 -> 03:29 AM) Why didn't we put all the German-Americans and Italian-Americans into internment camps during World War Two? We did it to the Japanese...and Trump wants to exclude Muslims now. But why were the Germans and Italians assumed to be more patriotic? Were the Romans simply being more patriotic when they crucified all those terroristic, insurrectionist Christians in the Coliseum and fed them to the lions? They were enemies of the emperor and were making it more difficult to govern the far-flung provinces.... Id imagine it has something to do with the fact that Japan attacked us on our own soil and the other 2 countries didnt.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 17, 2015 -> 09:20 AM) Religious guy did kick out poor women from a shelter because they were having sex with men, though. edit: they are actually closing the shelter temporarily for renovations. I still don't know what sort of renovations you'd need if you wanted to segregate men and women. Like jenks said, it kinda looks like a motel so you'd think it's separate rooms already? http://www.wymt.com/content/news/Homeless-...-362038531.html edit2: but this also really undercuts the original claim that there were more men than women: lol

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 06:31 PM) Yes, that is a correct statement. Today, right now, they have kicked the women that were there out and barred any more from coming into the shelter. That at some hypothetical point in the future they may possibly renovate the facilities and would then accept women again doesn't change that. edit: this is a selfie I just took though You said they barred women and children from coming to the shelter. I posted a quote of the guy saying "Woodward said he would like to be able to accept women in the shelter in the future. However, he said he would need to renovate the facility." Apparently this is such a big deal to you that youve resorted to memes...

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 05:10 PM) I'm not missing that point. I was using the story to illustrate a different point (religious charities sometimes do s***ty things for religious reasons), so it's not particularly relevant. Ideally, the shelter just doesn't do the dumb thing it did. There's no need for them to close down, but there was no need to ship women and children out and bar any more from coming, either. If their funding comes from donations, I'd hope people send their money to shelters that wouldn't do the same things they did, but again not really central to the point.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 06:04 PM) Yeah see that's the problem, what you quoted doesn't contradict what I said even if you are assuming that they have some renovations planned and funded in order to be able to accept women (even though renovations after not actually needed as evidenced by the fact that women were there until recently!). "I'd like to be able to buy a Ferrari, but I'd need $300k" doesn't mean I actually have a plan or the funding to get one. What I said is that they aren't accepting women or children, which they aren't. That they would after hypothetical renovations doesn't make that statement wrong. Neither of us has any clue what their future intentions are. Sure you seem to think you do, but you dont. I was pointing out that they mentioned they hoped to accept women and children again in the future after renovations. Thats literally it. Can I prove that this is a sincere comment? (Since this is apparently the most important issue being discussed here) No I guess I cant. Can you prove they didnt mean it? Well you sure as hell appear to think you can, but no you cant.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 05:46 PM) You're the one who quoted and bolded my post on the first place. I was responding to that. Ya I was just pointing out to you that the other article mentioned something that contradicted something you posted. You are right though, I guess I dont have any CONCRETE evidence that this shelter has any plans to EVER accept women or children! For all we know they might never even do any renovations! Until I see 3 handwritten quotes from contractors for the pertinent upgrades Im gonna boycott this charity.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 05:27 PM) He said that he'd "like to be able" to accept women in the future, but that he'd need to renovate. There's nothing concrete about him ever actually accepting women in the future. Of all the things being discussed in this thread the thing you choose to nitpick is that theres no concrete proof he might want to accept women in the future?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 05:17 PM) Woodward is not currently accepting women or children into the shelter i.e. he has barred any more from coming in, like I said. Because some men and women had sex (which jenks characterized as a "whore house" for some reason? did I miss the alleged prostitution angle?) What does this even mean lol? I was just pointing out that they said they were planning on taking women and children in the future after renovations.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 05:10 PM) I'm not missing that point. I was using the story to illustrate a different point (religious charities sometimes do s***ty things for religious reasons), so it's not particularly relevant. Ideally, the shelter just doesn't do the dumb thing it did. There's no need for them to close down, but there was no need to ship women and children out and bar any more from coming, either. If their funding comes from donations, I'd hope people send their money to shelters that wouldn't do the same things they did, but again not really central to the point. Re bolded, info is from jenks' link.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 05:02 PM) s***ty, discriminatory charity is still charity, but it sucks that it's s***ty and there's nothing wrong with calling it out for being s***ty. There are non-s***ty charities that don't make stupid moves like this one did for s***ty reasons, and those are the charities that should be supported. eta sending them to a different shelter 30 minutes away is still tossing them out s***ty charity > No charity is the point youre missing. Who is talking about supporting this charity anyway? Should the shelter close down and should they throw out everyone else now? Or maybe, just maybe the fact that theyre helping some homeless people (no matter how ridiculous the circumstances are) better than not helping anyone?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 04:42 PM) The narrative is that you're a s***ty person for tossing out women and children because some women might be having sex with some men at the shelter. eta: good lesson in why relying on private charity instead of robust, nondiscriminatory public programs is not always the best idea, though! I dont agree with what this shelter did but at the same time charity is charity, and if you took the time to read absolutely anything else about the situation than "RawStory" (lol) Youd see they didnt toss out women and children, they sent them to a different shelter. Granted its weird and not everyone is going to agree with why they did it but you have to see the irony of some SJW crying about a charities policy despite the fact that the charity has likely helped more people in one day than they have in their entire lives.