DByrd2

I think it is too late to change. (I know I said after Man City, but a few weeks can make or break the feasibility of a managerial move helping your squad.

Keeping him this long was a gamble on a CL spot finish. We are fighting for our lives to not be in a UEL spot so that we can bring in even more players for a system slot hasn’t proven he can make work at all in the EPL.

I don’t want Alonso either, but holy hell… I don’t like my leadership core having open and public disputes with the gaffer, multiple players announce they are walking away, and my main guys talk about giving up mid-game multiple times in a season.

It screams lack of trust in the manager by the players.

I hope we get pummeled.

I want Slot gone yesterday.

quote:

---

all I can find is incel bullshite

---

Weird… it’s almost like if you watched the tweet in the OP (or read the transcript) you’d have gotten a direct explanation of what he meant, in context, by the VP.

Instead you did what you did.

Do better.

It’s hardly been what one could consider a “war”. :lol:

No nerve, simply observation.

Happy Easter to you and yours, as well.

quote:

---

Then spell it out for them. It’s not hard.

---

I wasn’t talking to them.

quote:

---

No one’s wrapped tight. Just crap reporting that should be corrected.

---

Maybe not wrapped tight, but definitely a self-centered douchebag in your case.

You had plenty of chances to “spell it out for them”, but chose to be a dick instead. :lol:

GFY (That one means “Go frick Yourself”, in case you didn’t know.)




And for those still wondering, a “WSO” (pronounced “Wizz-oh” in military language) is a Weapons Systems Officer. He/she is in charge of the weapons and armament systems on board the aircraft. They have no primary piloting or aircraft navigation duties.

quote:

---

bad93ex

---

I get that, but this dude made a comment about a single match.

I am on your side about Salah, just pointing out that the dude you quoted/responded to was only talking about a single match it seemed.

:cheers:

quote:

---

This aged so well

---

How does a match-specific comment not age well, bub?

Either it was right about that match or not… And aside from that, Salah is gone after this season anyway.

Honestly, even though I don’t care for Slot, I would bench him for the rest of the season.

You make this grand announcement that you’re leaving and then turn in a stinker? Seems like you have already mailed it in.

I will always love and appreciate the years Salah gave us, but this last six months has been fricking terrible for his legacy and fan relationship.

quote:

---

SlowFlowPro

---

I know what you did and didn’t ask for. The decision has holes when compared to what the current argument is.

You’re acting as though this exact case has been heard before. Just like there is historical context regarding the 14th Amendment and WKA decision, there is the same here among the carrying out and abuse of the legal immigration system.

Being domiciled is a separate, but relevant, discussion in terms of citizenship, birthright or otherwise.

Are criminals (VISA overstays or even just those who snuck in, and those not actively in the legal process to gain status) bearing allegiance to our nation? Definitely doesn’t seem so, and that was a huge basis in the SCOTUS decision of WKA.

Don’t act pretentious just because someone doesn’t fall for your snapshot gotcha routine, SFP. It’s an intellectual discussion, not a dick measuring contest.

quote:

---

Cite the part of the ruling that specifically referenced work permits.

---

The narrative of the presenting attorneys of his case outlined the legal working status of both he and his parents as being domiciled by those means.

quote:

---

You clearly have not read WKA

---

Because I read it to mean what it says? :lol:

quote:

---

His "work permit" is irrelevant UNLESS he was a diplomat and you're referring to some sort of paperwork reflecting that.

---

WKA was recognized (as were his parents) under federal immigration laws (temporarily or otherwise, and possibly with exceptions) as citizens because they had the work permits, were of age, and had already been LEGALLY permitted by the government to work in the United States.

If he had snuck in on a ship, it would be different. He had legal right to be here. His parents had legal right to be here.

The 14th Amendment cannot set the precedent (but will likely be used to do just that) in this case because we are talking about the children of non-citizens.

Those with legal right to be here for the purpose of work, whether temporary or long-term, are under the jurisdiction of the USA by virtue of being approved by the federal government to work here.