Paxton vs Talarico

119,863 Views | 1354 Replies | Last: 1 hr ago by WorthAg95
twk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There is nothing unlawful about a conference enforcing eligibility rules, or even enacting them. The Big XII is not a party to the pending suit, and is not bound by the injunction. If Tech wants to join them in the suit, they can, but I think the Big XII, as a new party in the case, might have the opportunity to object to Curry as a visiting judge in the case (don't know how that works when you are added to the case long after the visiting judge is appointed, but you normally get one strike).

The only one who has committed any unlawful acts in this mess is Sorsby, but Tech is asking the courts to take actions contrary to the law just in in order to keep the guy eligible and avoid wasting NIL money. It's a shame that they found a judge gullible enough to help them out, but that doesn't mean that everyone else is condemned to follow down that path without using whatever leverage they may have.
Science Denier
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
twk said:

Science Denier said:

twk said:

Sure they can. UH not showing up would be a breach of contract. Maybe there's a liquidated damages clause like we had with LSU, maybe not. But, as Tech would be well aware, they can't successfully sue UH without the permission of the legislature. That's why they are threatening the conference, instead.


Conferences set schedules. Conference members can't just not play them. There are no LDs. They can leave the conference and pay exit fees, but not individual game.

Oh, sure, I see the Big XII kicking UH out for not playing Tech. Sure...


I didn't say that. I said "they could leave". Not kicked out. If they stay in conference, they have to play.
LOL OLD
Science Denier
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
twk said:

By the way, you guys need to think how warped your thinking is. You are supporting Texas Tech in their quest to play a guy who violated the cardinal rule of sports, just because the guy you support politically feels compelled to come to their aid (and we all know the reason why he feels that way).

There's no need to defend the indefensible. Paxton is just doing a very political thing here. Stop embarrassing yourselves by pretending otherwise.


Not defending Tech. Defending Paxton and his legal position. The courts ruled he can play.
LOL OLD
Serious Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
you aren't so naive as to think that one court ruling is absolute, are you?
Science Denier
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Serious Lee said:

you aren't so naive as to think that one court ruling is absolute, are you?


No. I suggested the NCAA drop the current ruling and limit the punishment to 2 years instead of lifetime and make "medical treatment" be part of the deal. That addresses the courts points.

But the way it is now, there won't be any more court hearings until the season is over. And if thing is done, then he has to play. And a conference can't do much. There is no legal grounds as Tech is just following the court order.
LOL OLD
K2-HMFIC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BMX Bandit said:

O/U on how many voters will stay home in november for vote talarico because of this action by the AG's office:


17



But it feeds the narrative that he's a corrupt opportunist.

Whoop2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I believe people will hear about it if the right cards are run!
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Whoop2 said:

I believe people will hear about it if the right cards are run!

yeah, but Paxton wrote a letter for Texas Tech. Grave mistake. ...so the preacher who talks about how Mary could have aborted Jesus, which makes baby skull crushing biblically approved, is probably the best choice now, right?
Whoop2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not many. A vote for Paxton keeps a communist nut ball out of our Senate position
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Science Denier said:

Serious Lee said:

you aren't so naive as to think that one court ruling is absolute, are you?


No. I suggested the NCAA drop the current ruling and limit the punishment to 2 years instead of lifetime and make "medical treatment" be part of the deal. That addresses the courts points.

But the way it is now, there won't be any more court hearings until the season is over. And if thing is done, then he has to play. And a conference can't do much. There is no legal grounds as Tech is just following the court order.


Tech wasn't ordered to let Soresby play. Or even start him.
Line Ate Member
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
K2-HMFIC said:

BMX Bandit said:

O/U on how many voters will stay home in november for vote talarico because of this action by the AG's office:


17



But it feeds the narrative that he's a corrupt opportunist.


It says that he is a politician. That is all it says.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Line Ate Member said:

K2-HMFIC said:

BMX Bandit said:

O/U on how many voters will stay home in november for vote talarico because of this action by the AG's office:


17



But it feeds the narrative that he's a corrupt opportunist.


It says that he is a politician. That is all it says.


It more so says he's an idiot. Contentious election and you choose a side that is extremely unpopular in a state where Tech is one team out of many in the state. And all the others are rightly pissed about this.

Why even wade here? And if so why not communicate it in a not so public way, to include threatening another state university (Houston)?

I'll still vote for him over Talarico because he's a freak lunatic, but Paxton is just a dip**** when it comes to optics and judgment.
ErnestEndeavor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As I said multiple times before, Ken Paxton doesn't give two s**** about the law anything or other than his donors. He is for sale. He is corrupt. He uses the power of his office to help his donors. He was impeached for it and he should have been convicted. He's pulling the same s*** for Cody Campbell now. He is a pay-for-play prostitute.

Our choices are this guy or a gay communist.
dmz233
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Whoop2 said:

Not many. A vote for Paxton keeps a communist nut ball out of our Senate position


This is why I'll be voting for Paxton in November.
Ellis Wyatt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Prove it.
rab79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ErnestEndeavor said:

As I said multiple times before, Ken Paxton doesn't give two s**** about the law anything or other than his donors. He is for sale. He is corrupt. He uses the power of his office to help his donors. He was impeached for it and he should have been convicted. He's pulling the same s*** for Cody Campbell now. He is a pay-for-play prostitute.

Our choices are this guy or a gay communist.


So you are voting for the garden variety politician then, right?
ErnestEndeavor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I will take a morally bankrupt and corrupt right winger over a crazy leftist because at least the morally bankrupt right wingers aren't big on regulating my life too much while the crazy leftists will impact my life far more.

Getting Paxton out of the Texas AG office is a win either way. He's a better fit to be corrupt in the Senate.
BillYeoman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Paxton is a POS.

Threatening to sue Big 12 Texas schools if they don't play a school (Tech) that allow players of 1 school to bet on college football?

F Him.

Republican need to reconsider this a-hole.
hunter2012
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ErnestEndeavor said:

As I said multiple times before, Ken Paxton doesn't give two s**** about the law anything or other than his donors. He is for sale. He is corrupt. He uses the power of his office to help his donors. He was impeached for it and he should have been convicted. He's pulling the same s*** for Cody Campbell now. He is a pay-for-play prostitute.

Our choices are this guy or a gay communist.

Not even a decision, I'll pick the corrupt over the self destructive every minute of every hour.
samurai_science
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ErnestEndeavor said:

As I said multiple times before, Ken Paxton doesn't give two s**** about the law anything or other than his donors. He is for sale. He is corrupt. He uses the power of his office to help his donors. He was impeached for it and he should have been convicted. He's pulling the same s*** for Cody Campbell now. He is a pay-for-play prostitute.

Our choices are this guy or a gay communist.

the impeachment was political and means nothing.


The Acquittal: Following a trial in the Texas Senate in September 2023, senators voted to acquit him on all charges.

samurai_science
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oh no said:

Whoop2 said:

I believe people will hear about it if the right cards are run!

yeah, but Paxton wrote a letter for Texas Tech. Grave mistake. ...so the preacher who talks about how Mary could have aborted Jesus, which makes baby skull crushing biblically approved, is probably the best choice now, right?

Old McDonald
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ErnestEndeavor said:

As I said multiple times before, Ken Paxton doesn't give two s**** about the law anything or other than his donors. He is for sale. He is corrupt. He uses the power of his office to help his donors. He was impeached for it and he should have been convicted. He's pulling the same s*** for Cody Campbell now. He is a pay-for-play prostitute.

Our choices are this guy or a gay communist.
yeah there's no affirmative case to make for paxton whatsoever, which is why we're seeing so many republicans cope themselves into deep psychosis about talarico. TDS has a new definition.
Yesterday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BillYeoman said:

Paxton is a POS.

Threatening to sue Big 12 Texas schools if they don't play a school (Tech) that allow players of 1 school to bet on college football?

F Him.

Republican need to reconsider this a-hole.


Well our other choice wants to take our guns, limit free speech, allow mentally ill children to castrate themselves before adulthood and allow as many illegals into Texas as possible.

The gop candidate has to be the antichrist for me not to vote for him. Stop putting up goobers who want to ruin Texas.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Old McDonald said:

ErnestEndeavor said:

As I said multiple times before, Ken Paxton doesn't give two s**** about the law anything or other than his donors. He is for sale. He is corrupt. He uses the power of his office to help his donors. He was impeached for it and he should have been convicted. He's pulling the same s*** for Cody Campbell now. He is a pay-for-play prostitute.

Our choices are this guy or a gay communist.
yeah there's no affirmative case to make for paxton whatsoever, which is why we're seeing so many republicans cope themselves into deep psychosis about talarico. TDS has a new definition.


The affirmative case for Paxton is that he will support the 2nd amendment, put conservatives on the the federal bench, and block progressive legislation while Talarico won't.

And stop gaslighting us about character. You'll be happier than a pig in **** if Plantner defeats Collins in Maine.
AggieVictor10
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's a red wave year
Neither of the commies stand a chance
“…What?”

- Joe Biden
DonHenley
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Red year wave based on what? Increasing inflation, higher prices, and directionless war in Iran?
Iraq2xVeteran
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BillYeoman said:

Paxton is a POS.

Threatening to sue Big 12 Texas schools if they don't play a school (Tech) that allow players of 1 school to bet on college football?

F Him.

Republican need to reconsider this a-hole.

I would still rather vote for Ken Paxton than James Talarico because the alternative is much worse. James Talarico is trying to disguise his liberal extremism by pretending that he is a moderate Christian man, but his tweets and votes indicate that he has progressive views.

1. He says that God is nonbinary.

2. He thinks there are six genders.

3. He stood up in front of the Texas house and tried to stop a bill banning trans men from competing in women's sports. He called men in girls' sports a "far-right conspiracy theory."

4. He called illegal aliens his "constituents" and gave them advice on evading ICE in 2019.

5. He argues that ICE has become a "rogue organization" and calls for it to be completely dismantled and replaced with an agency that focuses on genuine public safety rather than "hunting down" citizens and families

6. He advocated for dismantling the state's prison systems. He has famously argued that "prison is violence". He frequently champions the idea that the entire penal model should be reimagined to focus on healing, education, and addressing the root causes of crime rather than government institutionalization.

7. He voted against laws that cracked down on violent criminals and human smugglers.

'Prison Is Violence': Talarico's Radical Takes On Criminal Justice
Rapier108
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You're responding to a guy who said on this thread he's voting Democrat this year, including for Talafreako, because of his hated for Paxton. He doesn't care about positions or anything else.
"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." - Sir Winston Churchill
Who?mikejones!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BillYeoman said:

Paxton is a POS.

Threatening to sue Big 12 Texas schools if they don't play a school (Tech) that allow players of 1 school to bet on college football?

F Him.

Republican need to reconsider this a-hole.


Our choice is either talarico or paxton. That's it.

That's easy. Paxton every day for the week and twice on Sunday. All politicians are corrupt so that's just standard operation. Not all blasphemous charlatans
Im Gipper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BillYeoman said:

Paxton is a POS.

Threatening to sue Big 12 Texas schools if they don't play a school (Tech) that allow players of 1 school to bet on college football?

F Him.

Republican need to reconsider this a-hole.



Lifetime Republican here. I was all set to vote Paxton, but since his office wrote a letter to the Big 12, I am now going to vote for lopping off the weiners of young boys and protecting Trans abortion rights. It only make sense!

I'm Gipper
Ag87H2O
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BillYeoman said:

Paxton is a POS.

Threatening to sue Big 12 Texas schools if they don't play a school (Tech) that allow players of 1 school to bet on college football?

F Him.

Republican need to reconsider this a-hole.

There is no reconsideration. Paxton was elected by a large majority to be the nominee.

He is by far the better choice as opposed to Talarico. It's an easy decision.
Txhuntr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Who?mikejones! said:

BillYeoman said:

Paxton is a POS.

Threatening to sue Big 12 Texas schools if they don't play a school (Tech) that allow players of 1 school to bet on college football?

F Him.

Republican need to reconsider this a-hole.


Our choice is either talarico or paxton. That's it.

That's easy. Paxton every day for the week and twice on Sunday. All politicians are corrupt so that's just standard operation. Not all blasphemous charlatans



Anyone can abstain from voting for a race. Going to bat for a glorified high school in the least populated area of the state is a really dumb move for someone trying to win a statewide election
Who?mikejones!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sure. You could abstain. Then you for sure will get what you absolutely don't want.

Again, you've got 2 choices and one is clearly, by a long amount, more likely to produce the results I want. The other is 1000% likely to produce the results i don't want.

So, abstain all you want. Its stupid and self defeating. If you want tceh to ruin your day twice, go for it
Who?mikejones!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Old McDonald said:

ErnestEndeavor said:

As I said multiple times before, Ken Paxton doesn't give two s**** about the law anything or other than his donors. He is for sale. He is corrupt. He uses the power of his office to help his donors. He was impeached for it and he should have been convicted. He's pulling the same s*** for Cody Campbell now. He is a pay-for-play prostitute.

Our choices are this guy or a gay communist.
yeah there's no affirmative case to make for paxton whatsoever, which is why we're seeing so many republicans cope themselves into deep psychosis about talarico. TDS has a new definition.


Lolz. We dont have to "cope" ourselves. Talarico does all the work.
K2-HMFIC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Who?mikejones! said:

Sure. You could abstain. Then you for sure will get what you absolutely don't want.

Again, you've got 2 choices and one is clearly, by a long amount, more likely to produce the results I want. The other is 1000% likely to produce the results i don't want.

So, abstain all you want. Its stupid and self defeating. If you want tceh to ruin your day twice, go for it


Better to abstain, wait six years to get the right person in office than elect Paxton and have him in office in perpetuity.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.