Ghoat

New England is probably the only locker room he can't poison. It's hard not to like Mayfield, he is a baller.

There are apps for that sir

Antonio Brown lol, what a drama queen. And OF COURSE it's the Raiders. What a dumpster fire

Maybe it's the combo of he and Iwobi (and yes I know Lincoln is EPL quality) but I think we had more shots in each of the last two games then we did in the first three combined

Besides the animal names, lions tigers bears eagles and such, most are some geographic reference to the area. Galaxy - LA/Hollywood stars, Portland Timbers - Oregon is heavily forested and timber is big business in the area, Seattle Sounders - Seattle sits right on the coast of the Seattle Sound. Pittsburgh Steelers - being an old steel town. Green Bay is a neat one tho, they asked a local meat packing company to help the when uniforms and some money in the early 1900's, and they became the Packers. There probably isn't a lake anywhere near Los Angeles, but the Lakers kept the nickname when they moved from Minnesota "Land of 10,000 lakes" Houston Dynamo...no clue!

Finally started Peaky Blinders this week. Generally speaking I don't care for mob/ganster shows. I didn't pay much attention to the music until (I leave subtitles on) it popped up with "Hardest Button to Button" by White Strips, which is a great time....but it was different song. Since then I have paid more attention - it throws me off a bit, with modern music set against the 1920's backdrop. That said, they have some great music. But sure as shit, I'm pulled in, halfway thru the second season after a couple of days. But it's really weird seeing John Stones playing a Birmingham gangster, but he's more convincing in that role than as a CB.

Happy Labor Day Weeked to my fellow Yanks! Futbol this morning and tomorrow morning, college football this afternoon, tonight (Fuck Bama, War Eagle!), as well as tommorow and Monday night, some NASCAR tonight - a plethora of sports, enough to drink to all weekend while celebrating the last weekend of the summer over the grill. Tell the resident MILF to enjoy a drink, just sit there and look pretty -we got this! 'Merica! Where we celebrate working by taking the day off! Happy Labor Day all

Beastiality, cool. Homophobic beastiality crosses the line? Got it *scribbles some notes* What if said compromised goat was male, but Dutch? Asking for a friend, of course.

What must it tell Mirallas that we couldn't even find somebody in his own country who would pay for him. "Dude, we traded you for 3 Belgian waffles, your flight leaves in the morning" *fist bump* After he signed a new 3 year deal in 2017 after I wander if he had a picture of RK in congress with a wondering goat?

Thanks Steve, that was my assumption, but I have always "wandered" (free bait for the Grammatics amongst us)

Dumb question: When a player "turns in" or "submits" a transfer request, what does that mean, procedurally? Is it simply the player (or possibly agent) informing management via call or email they wish to leave? Or is there an actual form or specific paperwork that must be submitted from a player or authorized representative requesting an exit?

Fair enough. The older I get the less and less tolerant I get to the religious conservatives - the Christian Right. While I am a Believer and have a faith, it's personal - I don't want mine or anyone else's to drive policy. One of the candidates running for mayor here in Montgomery, who I really kinda liked, ran a TV spot that opened with "The Bible tells us..." there went my vote. If I wanted to know what the Bible told me, I'd read it myself or listen in the church hall, not City Hall. Stay in your lane, dipshit. Needless to say the Religious Right has a disproportionately unhealthy influence in my part of the world.

Kean looked most dangerous to me when he started wide or in the right channel and came inside. Makes me wonder how we would look if we flipped Richy to left, put Kean on right with DCL up top. Speaking of, DCL looked surprisingly nifty moving with the ball at his feet around the box in his cameo.

Yeah practically no touches. Delph does play a nice long ball down the wings

Dear God it's not even 2PM, and I'm looking for my bottle of vodka

FIgures, I subscribed to it last year for the FA Cup (the didnt televise ANY of it) and prompty forgot about it, just cancelled it a month or two ago, go figure. &)#&*()# Disney

Anyone aware of a US stream (or a VPN-able one)

yeah I was hoping Davies would be in there. Wonder if he picked up a knock, he's not even on bench

I'd love to see Kean play the first 60 or so, but I'm fully prepared for it to be DCL, based on time/fitness more than anything else.

Haha, that made me laugh Out of curiously, how do you define "conservative" as it relates to party, policies etc. Generally speaking that is, not trying to box you into a narrow definition, but to understand your context when you use the term

Those steps seem basic enough, with the exception of the 3rd. Our legal system expressly forbids discriminating against (domestic) parties from petitioning the government. Everything isn't black and white when it comes to practical applications. It would be much simpler to wave a wand and make the happen in Australia. Almost 90% of your power comes from fossil fuels. You have something like 25 million people, but over half are in 5-6 cities along the east cost. You could slap 20 nuclear power plants in a 500 or so mile cluster and have power for 13-15 million people - literally solved over half your power grid with zero carbon footprint from power. Far more complicated in the US. There are 40 million-ish people on our east cost going from Virginia up, 3-4 times as many as your east coast example above. There are 50 million on our west coast. 20 million in Florida. 30 million in Texas. If you extrapolated the same data, it would take two HUNDRED plants to power that grid. And that leaves 180-200 million people scattered across about 40 other states to convert. You have a very small population over a huge area. The UK, or Germany, has a large population in a small area. We have a huge population over a huge area - that is an entirely different kettle of fish, even if we have significantly more resources available. Sure we (the US) have 7X the GDP of the UK with 5-6X the population but in an area FOURTY times larger. I really don't think a lot of people truly understand just how frigging big the populated area of this country is - it's about the same area as the entire continent of Europe. I think the goal is worthy, and difficult or not, we need to make progress towards carbon reduction. If Australia can successful overhaul it's entire power grid, transportation system and transform the economy to meet the basic NGD tenants to be "carbon neutral" by 2030 or even 2040, that is fantastic. But it is absolutely anise to expect what worked in Australia to work just the same in the US or the UK, it's apples and oranges. Feel free to look it up, but there are many on the US left that love the idea, but don't believe it's practical, or even doable. For the record, I used nuclear plants in the example because they produce the most non-fossil power, at an average of about 1 gigawatt (700,000 people) each, and it kept the math easier. Not because I think we need to build massive numbers of nuclear reactors in the next 20-30 years

This is in year 4 after The Affordable Care Act/Obama Care passed. Seeing how it got 1 GOP vote in the House, and not a single GOP Senator voted for it, perhaps that would be a better question for the Democrats? If you know how we can deliver universal care at half the cost, we'd all love to know, I assure you.

I really think you are getting too tangled up in definitions. I have no idea why this group is labeled, or labeled themselves "progressive" but that's the case here, regardless of what the term means to you. Like "authorization left", I still have no idea what policies are embodied in that, but it's clear to you. Obviously they have different connotations. Simply put "liberals" put more faith in government than private sector/individuals to provide solutions for the needs of it's citizens. "Conservatives" the opposite. That's about it. Both are required, but the how much/little government is "best" is the battleground, inter and intra-party. Therein lies you answer about conservatives and the Green New Deal. Regardless of how important carbon reduction itself may be to conservatives, for the GND to be implemented and actually work as intended in the USA, it would require a significant expansion of federal powers, government personnel, regulations and money. Which, by definition, makes conservatives leery at best.

Primarily the "progressives" (using quotes because that's what the wing is basically called not in a mocking tone or such) that are advocating the New Green Deal, Medicare for all, Student Loan Forgiveness, impeachment. Pelosi is not in favor of most of that, but she is having a hard time moving the party toward the agenda she had in mind when she assumed majority leadership, and she can't keep the progressives in step so to speak. By me saying that it's "not a thing" over here, what I'm saying is that's not a term that is really commonly used here, at least for me I don't go "oh you mean like so-and-so". I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I'm just saying that's not a term I'm familiar with in the context of American politics. Simply stated, I have no idea who or what the fuck you're talkin about! I would not refer to the abortion laws in Alabama that are being passed as restrictive. Personally I'm not real comfortable with the abortion laws that NY has passed either. But I think the word you're looking for in the Alabama laws is draconian. Short answer, no I can't, not even close.

Flip Delph and Davies so the lefty is on left and righty on right, and I'd be happy w that XI