EastCoastNiner

http://i52.tinypic.com/anomu.gif

How a sport can pretty much have three "Opening Day's" is beyond me.

I just love the vagueness of the bill. Anything that "annoys" or is "offensive". .

If he remained on the Celtics, he would have been a 30ppg and 15rpg player.

http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugged-in/arizona-bill-could-criminalize-internet-trolling-184547052.html Goodnight sweet prince.

Feminism used to be about "equality", but now it's just about hating men and wanting them to suffer. Honestly, I have no clue how you get alimony (which is already ridiculous because it means the one receiving money is already re-married) that is more than ONE-HUNDRED PERCENT of what the guy makes as income. How the [expletive] is he supposed to pay that. Look, I don't know the entire story, but from that show, it seems like he did very little wrong, and is being screwed big time. The part that pisses me off the most is that his ex-wife asked for his release, didn't get more money because she's a greedy bitch, and asked for him to be thrown back in jail, and he was. The guy is completely right about the bull-shit catch 22. He loses his license because he's in jail, and can't get out until he pays the amount he wrongly "owes", yet he can't pay it if he doesn't have his license to practice law. I did a paper about alimony last year, and it's just [expletive]ing absurd. If you re-marry, why the hell should you be entitled to more money from another marriage, especially at 100%+ of the income the guy makes. How can a judge force him to pay that much money? This just really pisses me off even though I'm not involved.

-Guy is (was) a lawyer -Wife wanted to divorce him, so she did. -During the time divorced, he could see his kids nine hours every two weeks, and never had them overnight for two years. -Wife was allowed alimony. -Judge ordered alimony amount which was more than 100% than HE MAKES!!!!! -Since he was placed in jail for failure to pay the absurd amount, he lost his license to practice law. -Since he lost his license, he has no way to pay the absurd amount. -Was in jail for 7 days out of a 180 day sentence ([expletive]ing absurd) -Wife asks for his release after 7 days. -She tries to get more money in a settlement from him when he gets out, but it doesn't work out. -She asks for him to be placed back in jail, and he is. BULL-SHIT!

Are you kidding me with this shit?!?!?!?! Feminists are the biggest pieces of shit in this world. This guy is totally [expletive]ed unless he can get some real help. What a bitch his ex-wife is. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYb5xSd4PRs&feature=player_embedded

That's why I said we should keep it out of here, but if he wants to keep being a hypocrite and ignoring questions because he's being exposed.........

Ok, so you're just going to completely ignore the question because you'd either be backtracking, or changing your stance.

Keep ignoring the question that you're being asked. I'm not asking about the comparison between the two cases. Once again, YOU are saying that there is an outcry in the Zimmerman case because there has been no arrest made. So, once again, do you think there would still be an outcry if he is charged and found not guilty? Seriously, how many more times can you dance around a question that is clear as can be? Stop trying to divert the question to the other case that has been mentioned. I'm not talking directly about that. So, once again, you, in your own words have said that the reason the Zimmerman case has such attention is because of the lack of arrest and charges. So, once again, do you think that there would still be an outcry if he is arrested, charged, and found not-guilty?

You're saying the cases aren't comparable because the reason there is an outcry in the Zimmerman and Tayrvon Martin case is because there's been no arrest made, or charges filed. So, I'm asking, if there is an arrest made, and/or charges are filed, and Zimmerman is found not guilty, do yo think there will no longer be an outcry? The lack of arrest is what you're reasoning for an outcry is hinging on, so this is just addressing that point. I'd say, the answer is no, and that there still would be an outcry because people want to play the race card.

I'm not claiming you wouldn't usually calla a foul a foul, but I do think you're being slightly biased right now. I don't think it;s just the fact that you don't think it was a foul (I think it was), but that you are pointing to other plays that occurred after it that somehow "even it out". Are you telling me incidental contact is never called as a foul? That's pretty much what you're saying, but you also throw in the "even then" part. At the end of the day, I think it was a missed call. I think it could have certainly changed the game around. If Ohio State hits both FT's, then Kansas isn't getting an easy basket, and Ohio State is up one at that point. Are you really trying to say that referees don't call fouls when players are getting in position, even when the balls on the other side of the rim? You're not serious with this are you? I'll leave it here: Do you think it was a foul? Do you think it would have been a foul if not for the time left in the game? Do you think the outcome would have been different, had the call been made?

So, you'd be willing to say that if Zimmerman is arrested, goes to trial, and is found not-guilty, that there will no longer be media outrage? Your whole argument is hinging on him not being arrested. So, if he is arrested and not charged or found not guilty, then you'd be willing to bet that the media outrage would dwindle?

Do you mind showing me where I said the shooter was the one who was fouled?

1. I didn't tell him to post anything. I would have myself if I felt like it. 2. You're second comment makes no sense. There was no media outrage at the time. That's the entire point...........that you seemingly missed or are not understanding. Also, them being in jail has nothing to do with "media outrage". They were convicted with little media coverage. Anyways, we should probably just keep the Trayvon Martin stuff out of this thread and just unlock the other one. That's why I tend to stay out of this thread, or have until lately with some gifs because I know if I post it will turn into a shit-storm.

What's your point? They were still in the bonus.........

1. Nice job ignoring the entire play in question. I never said that Ohio State outplayed them. However, if that call was made, I have little doubt they would have won. Maybe you didn't see the play because you had some white and blue in your eyes. It was a game changing play. Do you mind finding where I said Kansas didn't play well or that Ohio State outplayed them? 2.M.J. isn't the G.O.A.T., and you locked the thread because you guys couldn't form an argument that was worthwhile. 3. Amare's career went downhill since he went to the city of losers. 4. I'd like to be shown some posts of me talking about Boston's "greatness" in terms of the Celtics. 5. I wasn't aware that someone has to watch a lot of college basketball to know what a foul is. 6. College basketball is pretty poor. The NBA is far superior in nearly every aspect. Anyways, I'm done with this topic. I don't care enough about it to keep talking about it. Edit: There we go. With about 1:17 on the clock, when Johnson went down and scored to put Kansas up by three points. Obvious foul is obvious. Obvious blood is obvious.

I'm not saying Kansas didn't play well either because I wanted them to win after being down big, but I don't like when there are obvious missed calls, both ways.

Ah, the plays that occurred after it when Ohio State could have had the lead instead of being down? Yes, it was not a travel. No, that was not a foul on Craft. It was a clean strip unless you don't want steals in basketball. For some reason, you don't seem to understand context or momentum. Instead of Ohio State being down, they likely would have been up after that non-call, which drew blood as well. Enjoy the 15+ point loss to Kentucky.

No, I'm talking about the blatant hack about a minute before that drew blood, and Kansas went down and scored. Instead of Ohio State shooting FT's, Kansas got a basket in transition.

I was pulling for Kansas, but they can thank a big blown call at the end of the game for their win.

Revis is a little punk. When he isn't holding every play, he isn't doing jack shit besides getting burned. He's a little disrespectful phaggot, and he's lucky Moss isn't back in New England to burn his shitty ass once again, while he used the hamstring as an excuse. http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:7748122

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdHB37UKpyQ

http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n620/JahRo225/1332989329340.gif