 | Forum
Reply | It’s only a laugh !
at 22:59 24 Sep 2025
From one of my friends here in North Carolina:
I AM A SEENAGER (Senior Teenager)
~ Author Unknown
I have everything that I wanted as a teenager, only 60 years later...
• I don’t have to go to school or work.
• I get an allowance every month.
• I have my own pad.
• I don’t have a curfew.
• I have a driver’s license and my own car.
• And I don’t have acne.
Life is Good!
Also, you will feel much more intelligent after reading this:
Scientists believe that brains of older people are slow because they know so much. People do not decline mentally with age, it just takes them longer to recall facts because they have more information in their brains. Much like a computer struggles as the hard drive gets full, so too, do humans take longer to access information when their brains are full. Researchers say this slowing down process is not the same as cognitive decline. The human brain works slower in old age, said Dr. Michael Ramscar, but only because we have stored more information over time. The brains of older people do not get weak. On the contrary, they simply know more.
Also, older people often go to another room to get something and when they get there, they stand there wondering what they came for. It is NOT a memory problem, it is nature's way of making older people do more exercise.
SO THERE!!
I have more friends I should send this to, but right now I can't remember their names. So, please forward this to your friends; they may be my friends, too.
++++++++++++
Have a great day and enjoy the rest of your week.
Thought for the Day: "We need to understand that life is not what we're given. It's what we create, what we conquer, and what we aim to achieve." (Author Unknown) |
| Forum
Thread | Trump's Speech to the United Nations regarding Europe's Immigration Problem
at 03:08 24 Sep 2025
I know a lot of you don't like President Donald Trump but I've noticed lots of banter regarding UK's illegal immigration problems, with some of you predicting the worst case scenario, which is a complete collapse due to the current poor immigration policy and the massive influx of immigrants. Here's a link to Trump's speech yesterday regarding Europe's problem:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-slams-un-creating-new-problems-questions-
What Europe has now the United States had under Joe Biden and to a lesser extent under Barrack Obama, which is an open door policy allowing anybody to come into the US. That has stopped due to President Trump's action to close our borders. |
| Forum
Reply | Charlie Kirk shot.
at 21:17 17 Sep 2025
Source, please for what you've read. $50M is about a little more than twice what I found:
"According to OpenSecrets, the National Rifle Association’s total outside spending on federal elections in 2020 was about $29,355,400."
According to Everytown for Gun Safety (EFGS), which tracks political spending and issues related to guns, reported that “more than 66% of the NRA’s federal independent expenditure spending was devoted to reelecting President Trump.”
EFGS also put the amount the NRA spent in support of Trump in 2020 at roughly $16.6 million.
The $30M is not a small amount but it is much smaller than the large donors to both Republican and Democrat parties. |
| Forum
Reply | Charlie Kirk shot.
at 20:44 16 Sep 2025
The gun used by the political assassin was a gift from his grandfather. The cowardly killer dumped his rifle, a 30.06 with scope, in the nearby woods after leaving his sniper perch. He then calls his transitioning male-to-female lover, telling him/her where it is, and asking him/her to pick up the rifle, so that there would be no evidence. I don't think the cowardly killer will be asking to be described as someone who is mentally-impaired ("loonie") during the trial.
The NRA (Nat'l Rifle Assn) is a legally-registered lobbyist organization or group but doesn't give any funds to the US Federal Government. However, just like other lobbyists, it has to report where its funding goes:
In 2024, the NRA reportedly spent about $2,040,000 on federal lobbying.
In 2025 (so far, as of mid-year), it has spent about $1,010,000.
In the 2023 cycle, the NRA spent about $2,305,000 on lobbying.
Source - OpenSecrets
How That Compares / Where It Ranks:
In 2024, the NRA was ranked 356 out of about 9,200 organizations tracked by OpenSecrets for lobbying spend.
That means the NRA is not among the very top spenders (which are often large corporations, industry associations, or major trade groups spending tens or hundreds of millions annually), but it's still a significant player, especially within issue‐areas like gun rights.
Other gun-rights related groups are increasingly spending more; for example, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is being reported in some sources as having overtaken the NRA in lobbying strength on certain issues. |
| Forum
Reply | Charlie Kirk shot.
at 20:10 15 Sep 2025
I re-read your post and see that I made a mistake. You're correct in that you didn't lump Trump, Kirk, and your PM Starmer in the list of bad guys. My bad.
And, I agree with your statement "that you think a good idea is a good idea wherever it comes from". I know Charlie Kirk would have agreed to that.
However, I would say that Kirk would never think that "everybody should have guns." He would say that every law-abiding person has the right to own a gun.
The US Constitution states that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
You don't have to own a gun if you don't want to. I own several but know plenty of people who do not own any. Furthermore, 99.9% of the US citizens who own guns use them responsibly. Why should I give up my right to own a gun that I use for hunting and trap and skeet shooting purposes? BTW, people who have been convicted of a felony (Federak crime) are not allowed to own a gun.
Yes, Kirk's shooter could legally own a gun. But we could lay blame on friends and family, and potentially those social media platforms he used, for not alerting officials and getting him medical attention based on the views and statements he was posting and seeing that he was potentially a threat to society. If he had been found mentally unstable, then his right to own a gun would be in question.
Historical Context (Late 18th Century) regarding the 2nd Amendment:
Prior to independence and while under British rule, American colonists had to deal with illegal searches and imprisonment by the British Military.
Militia focus: In 1791, the U.S. had no large standing army. Defense relied heavily on state militias made up of ordinary citizens. The opening phrase — “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” — reflects that context.
Suspicion of centralized power: Even after gaining independence, many Americans feared a powerful federal army could threaten liberty. Guaranteeing the right to keep and bear arms was partly about ensuring citizens could resist tyranny if necessary.
Everyday use of arms: Firearms were also common tools for hunting and protection on the frontier, so the right had both civic and personal dimensions. |
| Forum
Reply | Charlie Kirk shot.
at 18:23 15 Sep 2025
I see that you continue with your narrative of lumping conservatives in this "bad guy" column. As an American, I don't know that much about Starmer. But I am very familiar with Trump, and learning more about what Kirk was and stood for, which so far is all good.
So, what, in your opinion, is a "bad guy"? Here is a good example to help you base your opinion: Is publicly and falsely accusing Donald Trump in 61 (yes, that's sixty-one!) New York Times news stories from 2017-2019 (during his 1st Presidency), criminally (CRIMINALLY - the Democrat-led House of Representatives impeached him for his supposed criminal actions) "linking him to Russia and the phony Steele dossier, is that something bad or good? BTW, The New York Times has never apologized for their aiding and abetting of this fabricated story. So, who is/are the BAD guys here? Trump? Or, The NYTimes?
Is the FBI, during this same timeframe, which has been found complicit in this devious ploy initiated by Hillary Clinton and her 2016 Presidential campaign, both groups knowing that the dossier was a collection of made up lies, are they, James Comey, then FBI director, his deputy FBI director, Andrew McCabe, and Hillary Clinton and her staff, to be considered the good guys or bad guys for leading Americans to believe that Trump was illegally tied to Russia and based their opinions on the Steele dossier? So, who is/are the bad guys here? Trump? Or, the FBI director, dep director, Clinton, and her top aides? None of them have had to stand trial, (or have even apologized) and nor were they publicly shamed for their roles in Trump's wrongfully, trumped-up treasonous acts!! Let's include James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, and John Brennan, director of the Central Intelligence Agency in this group as well since they also had a huge influence on Congress and others in the top levels of the US government!
By the way, you're wrong about Charlie Kirk. He was one of the few good guys in this part of the American dog-eat-dog political world. He invited anyone, ANYONE, to debate him in a civil way. He never, NEVER got on his social media sites urging his followers to "take out", "remove from our society", and other code words or phrases against his opposition. Just look at how many of his opposition's influencers have taken the other route, the hate-speech route, on their social media sites where they promote deadly actions to be taken in a criminal, code-like way. |
| Forum
Reply | Vigouroux Today
at 15:27 11 Sep 2025
I'm the same way with West to East flying (7+ hours). Cannot fall asleep by simply tilting the chair back. I try to stay awake for at least 20 hours prior to departure so I can nod off when I sit down after boarding. Problem with this tactic is the flight crew keep waking me up either with their announcements over the loudspeakers, or with their gentle prods to ask me to put my seat back in the proper position. East to West is 10x easier, imo. |
| Forum
Reply | Richard Montague.
at 15:12 11 Sep 2025
I thought we hired Montague this past winter (right before Williams was canned) because of his research analytics program in identifying players he had developed and was using @ Nott City. If he were to go then would he take his research analytics program with him?
Yes, I've also read in some articles that RM was responsible for getting players over the line. |
| Forum
Reply | Richard Montague.
at 15:05 11 Sep 2025
Yes, Samuels-Smith, Yalcouye, Casey, and Benson. 4 loaned players. |
| Forum
Reply | Charlie Kirk shot.
at 03:42 11 Sep 2025
Charlie Kirk would be the first person to debate you or anyone else on the 2nd Amendment, the right to bear arms. He knew the US Constitution inside and out. In his debating, he would want to change his opponents' viewpoints on the subject at hand but he would go about it in a genteel manner. A devout Christian who would always express his belief in God & Jesus Christ, who believed in marriage, and encouraged his family, friends, and strangers in the sanctity of marriage and to have children. He made it his mission to speak to college students about conservatism via his Turning Point USA platform. Fabulous speaker, intelligent, funny, quick-on-his feet in debating, very charming & charismatic, inspirational, it was quite evident that he was appealing to more and more young people, especially college students, in the virtues of true conservatism, and the shortcomings of woke-ism. Only 31, married, and a father to two young children. Never graduated from college because someone early on saw his potential as a future leader, and encouraged Kirk to bypass college and pursue his dream, Turning Point USA. If you don't know much about him, then I suggest that you do some research and learn more about him. He was, as many conservative leaders believed, a future President of the US in the making. |
| Forum
Reply | Charlie Kirk shot.
at 21:51 10 Sep 2025
Charlie Kirk has died. Very sad & very much angry. I shake my head at the left's nonsense, cowardice, and evil. Terrible! |
| Forum
Reply | Swansea City v Hull City : Match day thread
at 17:01 9 Sep 2025
I like your thinking: Vip blasts one from just inside the 18, Inoussa collects a superb Galbraith pass & beats his man for what is deemed an outstanding team goal, and after coming on for Vip in the 80th min, Idah heads one home to finish a superb 3-0 Swans win. We all are looking forward to seeing how Sheehan brings this team together. |
| Forum
Reply | Idah
at 18:01 7 Sep 2025
Would love to see that! |
| Forum
Reply | Idah
at 16:29 7 Sep 2025
I agree wholeheartedly! Sheehan was correct in choosing Cullen over Vip on occasion, but has rightfully rewarded Vip with his recently-increased amount of playing time and starts due to his goals. We all want Vip to continue scoring for the sake of the team. But I agree, Sheehan's probably not totally convinced just yet, especially seeing how inconsistent his overall play has been, even with his recent rich vein of goals scored.
As to WR's prediction of Vip being sold in the Jan window, we need both Idah & him to do well, be happy & confident, and stay, especially if Swans are in contention for promotion. Might see one of them exit next summer though, especially if we're not promoted. |
| Forum
Reply | Delle Alli
at 02:44 4 Sep 2025
"float like a butterfly, sting like a bee!"  |
| Forum
Reply | How do you assess your feelings towards the club and its majority owners
at 02:36 4 Sep 2025
Even if we were to win the playoffs, I would consider us a top class team. Finishing top 2 even moreso. Making it to the Premier League is top class for any Championship club, no matter how you slice it
But my point was really about statements that try to promote positivity about "almost making it to the PL". The owners and recruitment staff aren't doing this for the "close, but no cigar" scenarios. Who's to say that if we were to finish in an "admirable" place in the standings but don't make it to the PL, then do we tell other teams who have great admiration for certain players to "fugg" off, that we're building for next year?
No, the owners & recruitment staff would probably consider selling assets and starting over again, because what they assembled didn't achieve their goal. And, quite frankly, that's their prerogative, if that's what makes sense for them to reach their ultimate goal, which is getting promoted to the Premier League. |
| Forum
Reply | How do you assess your feelings towards the club and its majority owners
at 19:45 3 Sep 2025
I have a problem with posters who say or imply that owners' and staff's aim might not necessarily be for promotion ... this year or season. If we aren't aiming for promotion this year or season, then all of our gushing comments are for naught, imo. Kudos to the owners and recruitment team for assembling a squad that has, at first glance, loads of talent and skill to be at least in the top six, if not the top two! I have faith in Sheehan, his staff, and the current team to gel quickly and start their ascent to the top. No excuses, please! Put a good product on the field and capacity crowds will follow. |
| Forum
Reply | How do you assess your feelings towards the club and its majority owners
at 16:14 2 Sep 2025
Very positive rating so far. The current owners seem to have more ideas & creativity on how to deal with the club at this level versus the Levien-led group.
Expectations? The club has at the very least made the team more competitive, on paper, it seems. A great follow-up report on how other Championship teams' recruitment ended up being would be a really good read. Of course, a lot of us are really excited about the signings we've made but how does it compare to other Championship teams?
Support for Sheehan? Absolutely! Only time will tell but if there is one manager out of the last 3 I trust in leading the team, it's Sheehan. Again, like others have stated, there's a lot of new players to add to the mix, to the recipe, and we should all give him some time to see if he's truly the one to put everything together. |
| | ncswan
|
Site Scores| Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 0 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.