JDaveG

Pure Football
  • Content count

    41,210
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    55

Everything posted by JDaveG

  1. Gotcha. They look sweet, but honestly, I'm way more into more traditional stuff these days. It sounds a lot like a Deluxe Reverb, which is weird since it's called the Fillmore. I'd stick with Friedman, Goodsell, etc. if you're going to drop some coin on a good amp. But that's me. The one "non-traditional" amp I'd consider is a Sommatone Roaring 20. Because Mike Cooley and Jason Isbell, that's why.
  2. I have no idea when that law was passed because I have never heard of it. Without saying too much, though, I doubt he would support that law for that reason. I mean, I'm not being particularly cryptic about who it is, but I'm not here to out my friends to the mob either, so........
  3. I'll check out the book. With regard to abortion policy, I will simply say I don't see it as either/or. You can educate, and you can pass laws to prevent wrongs. And we should do more to educate, and the Republican Party has a lot to answer for in how it handles such things. Keep in mind the modern conservative, like the modern liberal, at least those you run across the most (those you see online, etc., because most people don't talk about abortion policy at Starbucks), is generally just parroting their favored party's talking points. Many are ignorant about a lot of things. They have been conditioned by talk radio and Hannity and so forth. But I know a lot of pro life people. A whole lot. Most of them are conservative. Most of them are also way more heavily involved in things like crisis pregnancy centers, funding orphanages, etc. than you would ever imagine. They adopt. They give to the poor. They are not the caricatures they are painted as in pop culture.
  4. I'll have to look. Because that's not who I'm talking about. EDIT: no -- he wasn't in office then. He was first elected after that bill was put up for a vote.
  5. A steel string singer?
  6. I certainly support it. For what it's worth, the author of the recent adoption reform bill in Georgia is also a good friend of mine. He was SUPER pissed 2 years ago (or 3, not sure) when they appended the religious conscience bill onto his adoption bill to try to force it through, which of course killed both bills for that term. They passed it the next year as a clean bill. I'd wager he'd be first in line to provide incentives to people to adopt children who for whatever reason the mother could not raise on their own but who loved their child enough to give it a chance with another family. I'll mention it to him the next chance I get.
  7. @lostone did not limit his comment to politicians. He said “people who abhor abortion.” I agree about politicians.
  8. For what it’s worth, after the Georgia heartbeat bill passed, my extremely pro life wife started writing her elected representatives to push this very thing. She also began looking into helping local crisis pregnancy centers. The notion that pro life people don’t care about babies or their mothers after birth is mostly just a trope.
  9. Huge loss to the FO, but it happens. No team can hoard all the talent, and we've had more than our fair share of late.
  10. That chair will be empty after summary judgment. It might be empty after a MJP. But......BUT......having it adjudicated would presumably prevent the other side from raising it to the jury, so yeah, probably.
  11. Prayers ascend.
  12. I'd have taken Brady or Brees 10 years ago, or maybe even 5, over Ryan. I'm not sure today. It's not exactly a fool's errand. If we win the Super Bowl with either one, it's totally worth it. I'd be the first to say that. But I don't think that's a guarantee (perhaps not even a likelihood) at their age and current level of performance, and given that, my preference would be to ride or die with Matt Ryan. Not because he's "better," even today, than either of those guys. Only because if we trade the (near) future and don't win the Super Bowl, we're stuck looking for a QB again, and if that's the trade, I'd rather trade Ryan for multiple first rounders and pick that QB in the draft in a strong QB class. And I don't think there is any way we'd ever do that, so I'd have to say I wouldn't trade Ryan for any QB in the league right now.
  13. I love GMD’s reviews. Dude is on point.
  14. I would suggest, as I did during his confirmation hearings, that Kavanaugh is hardly a lock to overturn Roe. In fact, I'd wager him a probable vote against it.
  15. Wasn’t me, but I like the look.
  16. I was curious, because I could see situations where there would be a cause of action against the car dealership (or against gun dealers or manufacturers) for negligent entrustment. That's basically the cause of action they are pursuing, but it's odd that they claim the dealership knew or should have known of his criminal history. I have never had a criminal history pulled when purchasing a car, and I don't see how they are going to connect those dots. Doesn't mean they can't, but the best information I have leads me to believe that car dealership is going to get out on summary judgment. https://www.argusleader.com/story/news/2019/05/13/victim-sip-n-cycle-crash-sues-driver-car-dealership/1167088001/
  17. "Male Chihuahua, free to good home. Pees on floor and injures owners. Also bites because he's a Chihuahua. Up to date on shots though."
  18. I'm curious if the third dragon is going to die. Because Jon is the only one other than Dany who can deal with them. Maybe Tyrion, but I think Tyrion is not long for this world.
  19. .....is going to go in here and say something about the wheelchair ramp? SMH
  20. This is why I prefer to just sit out and let you all direct your stupidity at each other. It's also why I responded to @Gritzblitz 2.0, but am not responding to others. So I'll just let you get back to your fratricide.
  21. Some of them are, for sure. I don't place Georgia's law in that category. It includes exceptions for rape, life and health of the mother and a futile pregnancy (i.e., the baby will never survive). The only thing arguably draconian is the date set for the cutoff -- it used to be 20 weeks. Now it's 6 (or whenever there is a detectable heartbeat). But then, that gets to the too frequently begged question -- what is the status of the unborn. And unless that question is begged in favor of "non human clump of cells until after the entire baby exits the birth canal," then taking it from the viewpoint of the bill's authors, it is not draconian, but in fact is a compromise. The point of the law is this -- once there is a detectable heartbeat, we have a human life. The authors (and I) believe it is actually earlier than that, but the existence of the heartbeat is something that should give us a pretty solid basis to say "this is no longer merely a clump of cells," and so that was chosen. Once there is a human life, it should take extraordinary circumstances to justify snuffing out that life. And for that reason, the law sets forth a multitude of other benefits. The mother can claim the child on her taxes. She can collect support. And as I noted before, she can sue a doctor who performs an abortion on her past that date. It codifies the personhood of the unborn around a specific and bright line event -- the detection of a heartbeat. The ones that don't include exceptions for rape, life, health, etc.? Sure, those are bad laws, and in my opinion bad tactics. But if a detectable heartbeat is "draconian," I'd be curious to hear what you think would not be. 8 weeks? 10 weeks? 12 weeks? 20 is pretty close to viability under current medical technology, though I expect that to drop over the next 50 years as it has the past 50.
  22. This is really all that needs to be said. Lombardi could tell me my screen name on AFMB is "JDaveG" and I'd look it up to double check him on it.