mspart

Gutches vs Ruth. This might be a a great matchup. Ruth didn't have much in the way of international honors. Gutches was 1996 Olympian and took 7th, and was on the world Team every year after winning WC 1997, 7th in 1998, and won bronze in 1999. 2000 he won a match with a horrible back injury but lost the other two in the OTTs. With his back injury, he might not have done well in Sydney, but his replacment, Charles Burton, wasted an opportunity for Bronze. If Gutches could have gotten enough cold spray on his back, he might have been able to do it. Ed Ruth I don't think did much on the international stage. 3 time NCAA champion went the MMA route and was middlin' there. This would be really fun to see. I have to say, you can probably guess that I think Gutches would win. mspart

He needs bionic knees. They worked for Lee Majors. mspart

He still looks like a brute. I don't know about Banach but I tend to agree with you. mspart

Ferrari won't be able to handle the pressure of having to tow the line. mspart

Schultz and Banach - today. Who wins? mspart

I can get on board with this. mspart

You are too funny Mr. Dole. I don't even watch Fox news. Another ad-hominem attack based on zero knowledge. mspart

Is that taking into account injury history and liklihood of happening again? If Lee is healthy, he will be stellar I think. But I have to say I am impressed ADS prevailed in Zagreb Henri Deglane to get gold. mspart

Maybe at some point with cloning, we might be able to see these. mspart

But who has a better chance at International Glory at the Senior level? Lee or DeSanto? mspart

I don't consider it a win when you start with the name calling. I consider it a forfeit on your part. Your coach would be yelling at you and tomorrow's practice would be full of pushups and stairs. mspart

Where is DeSanto on the UWW rankings now? mspart

Same could be said for the boys. They learn how to control guys in folk style. I remember seeing Cael wrestling Sajidov in 2003 and Sajidov was on bottom and tried to get away and Cael just reeled him back in. I'm not sure classically trained FS wrestlers would have faired so well. Granted, there is not much need for this skill in freestyle but I believe that folkstyle is a better style for learning control. I could be wrong, and this is an ages long argument. But there's my $0.02. mspart

This is very sad. We just got a new worker here from Turkey. She moved here when she was young, speaks perfect English, but came to us by way of a winery job she had south of Istanbul. She has lived in the Seattle area half her life so she is pretty established here. mspart

What? mspart

Needed to get Tom Cruise out there and hop on the balloon and bring it down. He could jump out of an F22 with his extreme good aim. It took an F22 to bring it down? Seems like a lesser fighter could have handled it. I read an article that the F22 shot a heat seaking missile. What the heck was generating heat? I thought it was helium, not hot air. Oh well, it is down and now the frog men have to locate and bring it up. Any guesses? I'm guessing it is just as the Chinese said, it was a weather balloon with 3 semi trucks worth of equipment. mspart

Wow, now that's really good luck. mspart

You quoted me and then stated your opinion. I agree with you in regards to children. But the far left is not in agreement with you and opposes you with vitriol. The "don't say gay" bill in FL is the classic example. The left misnamed the bill on purpose. The bill was about not teaching sexual anything to K-3 elementary students. Why was this felt necessary in FL. Because that is the direction of school districts across the nation. It is not something that we can all support. There are many that support and want surgical and chemical "gender affirming care" to minors. That is just sick, yet, anytime you oppose this, they will pile on. So I do not agree that "we" can all understand and deplore this. I'm glad you and I agree on this however. mspart

And now with the ad-hominem attack! So predictable. Did I say anything like that? No. You lose the argument because you have nothing of value to argue with. Ad-hominem attacks are the last line of defense of a losing argument. Just can't think of anything else to say so personally attack your opponent seems like a thing to do. Again, as I said, case closed. mspart

Case closed. mspart

Unless you are a marxist. That is capitalism and must be avoided by all means. I agree with most of what you said, except. "Marxist, fascist, socialist, etc. are all labels being thrown around to get people angry and distract them from the things that are simple, obvious, and we can all support." It should seem obvious, but we have children being indoctrinated into transgenderism and enforced by chemical and physical means including surgery. And you better not say anything or your kid will be taken away by the state. This is patently wrong, but there is one side that just doesn't see it that way. Or they pretend not to see it that way. There are many other topics that are similar. That's why I agree with that statement but it cannot happen as we all are now. No one can agree on what is simple, obvious and something we can all support as of now. I suspect we might all agree we need to react with haste and harshness if hostile forces try to do something to us. But I'm not so sure about that. mspart

The chinese forced aircraft of ours in their airspace to land and be held hostage. This is a fact and they know it. Bringing down their balloon should not rile them at all. They should expect it. Perhaps they are trying to get a feel for what they can and cannot get away with. By not bringing it down immediately in whatever manner is best, we are signalling that we will tolerate chinese incursions of our airspace. Which might invite more such episodes. Why would we not bring it down, either by shooting it down or by some other means? This is basic national defense. They think they have jammed any signals that it might transmit and that is enough? If that is the case, then this is a spy machine and an overt act. I don't see why we condone such a thing. Bring it down. mspart

NYC got tough on crime under Giuliani. Crime went down. WA state had 3 strikes your out and prosecuted crime hard from 90s on. Crime rate when down. All of that is not happening anymore and we wonder why crime rate is going up. There is such a thing as cause and effect. We have seen it in live action both ways. Are we now too sophisticated to get tough on crime? We have better ways to deal with crime? The answer is demonstrably NO. Nice try with the baseball funny, but glibness doesn't really address the issue here. I have added to the conversation, explained my position, but you have not. You think saying strike 3 is clever and will end the conversation. What ends it is your refusal to offer anything of substance to substantiate your opinion. My opinion is double down on prosecuting gun crimes and give enhanced sentencing for the use of guns during a crime. At the very least, this will get those guys off the streets which will lower gun violence by that much. It might perhaps lower gun violence or the use of guns in crimes due to the enhanced penalties. Is this not even worth considering? Apparently not for you. There are strict gun control measures in Mexico, tough to get, but not banned. Yep, that stopped all those cartels. We have a difference of opinion here. Let's leave it at that. mspart

Any of you heard of this? https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/03/china-spy-balloon-us-airspace-00081073 Should it be brought down now? Or should it not? My input is to bring it down now and quit waiting. mspart

Well, when they put him away, that is deterrent for him. That is effective, or didn't you think of that? The problem is they do not prosecute gun crimes anymore. So in fact, there is no incentive to not use guns. If you are a murderer, you probably don't care I would agree. Not too many of those around. If you are a robber, you probably don't care. But when you take the murderers and the robbers off the street, you have reduced gun violence. And other lower level criminals will not want to go that direction. Your solution is to ban all guns I assume. Better get an amendment to the Constitution going then. Because there is no other way to do it. mspart