LSUMofro

From 1997 until 2007 Alabama went through 5 different coaches and posted a .500 per coach or below winning %. Alabama lucked up with Saban. You are relevant because a coach tried his luck in the NFL. LSU gives Alabama a game almost always. You schedule your bye week because of us. Sabans is one of the greatest defensive coaches of all times.

Thanks for your kind words. Just remember, LSU has been one play away most of the time. And we always have a punchers chance.

We should get Troy's coach.

I would play the WRs tight and jam the hell out of them. Make them should me they can beat us one on one.

Florida is coming in soft and timid. ~ Jeaux Burreaux

6.5
Kind of reminds me of MGMT. I can dig it. Dave Matthews/ Warren Haynes - Cortez the Killer

I like to watch the offensive production of this team. But in all honesty, I feel the 2009 Alabama team would beat this team. You could not throw on them.
USC 2003 team would be pretty hard to beat.
2007 LSU team would match up well with this team.

quote:

---

Scared? Not so much. Disappointed like your dad catching you with midget porn? Yeah

---

. Midgets r awesome

quote:

---

Isn’t your mascot literally a pussy?

---

Your mascot is hard to distinguish. We literally have to shove our figure in you to find out if your female... Or just a guy with a tiny dick.

John Adams said:

There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.

George Washington agreed, saying in his farewell presidential speech:


The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

quote:

---

While I stand by the position that the 17th Amendment is the worst Amendment ever, it's effects, combined with the grant of the franchise to a gender that is guided by emotion over logic and intellect (admittedly, with occasional exceptions), is well documented (rise of the welfare state, nanny state, overregulation, Title IX, poundmetoo, etc). Women having a voice in politics beyond influencing their husbands has proven to be a failed experiment. 

Serious consideration should be given to repealing the 19th Amendment.

---

quote:

---

quote:
Women's lib, suffrage, and feminism were major parts of all the early 20th century communist movements in Europe 



They continue to be a hallmark of modern Marxism, too. Not that there is any genuine belief in the value and morality of such ideals; they're just useful bludgeoning tools for deconstructing current power structures.

---

The country that you are describing is called Saudi Arabia. They have a King, their laws are based on religion, women don't really have rights, public beheadings. Hell, they have public stonings for women that are accused of infidelity. Now the downside, Health care in Saudi Arabia can be classified as a national health care system in which the government provides health care services. So you would have to fix that shite. Cause we know that ain't happening! Am I right,boys!?!?! LMAO! Some of you people are dumb as hell.