All teams who cheat should get the 2 year death penalty, just like SMU.

What kind of shitty workplace charges for coffee?

quote:

---

I enjoyed seeing the girl from Vanderbilt kick that ball that time, and she got NOTHING!

---

Actually, she couldn't hit a field goal. So she may have been overpaid.

I only have one question, Do you screw on the first date?

There is always the non-coffee club guy from another group on the floor who gets a cup, puts in a dollar bill then takes 4 quarters for his change. Yes, there are some that do it. It’s usually a Stanley or a Linda…..

quote:

---

Like at work, anyone who does not put money in the office coffee fund, they don’t get coffee.

---

If my place of employment forced me to pay for a coffee fund just to get some coffee I would quit

Why does Linda Smith always have to be such a party pooper? Why doesn’t Linda Smith try doing something constructive for once in her life? And what accounts for Linda Smith’s prodigious criminality and dissipation? This post is not the place to explore the answers to those questions. Its purpose is instead to lend support to the thesis that it must be reemphasized that the ripples of reaction on the Rant to Linda Smith’s soliloquies have spread, giving rise to universal calls to get Linda Smith to damp down the bellicosity of her paroxysms. The full truth of my conclusion I shall develop in the course of this letter, but the conclusion’s general outline is that Linda Smith has been leveraging her position of power and influence to legitimate irresponsibility, laziness, and infidelity. That’s clear. But she has been making the case that her strictures enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness. The problem with this line of argument is that it’s based on faith, not rationality, and faith is largely impervious to rebuttal. A related challenge is that the reason that so many well-meaning people fall for Linda Smith’s xenophobic, mad remarks is that Linda Smith has taken the trouble to articulate plausible, though deeply flawed, answers to the really broad questions of human existence. What is the purpose of life? What is truth? What is good or evil? Linda Smith readily provides answers to such deep questions in terms of convenient falsehoods such as that it is not only acceptable but indeed desirable to prop up corrupt despots around the world. Such beliefs illustrate a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in her malisons. Then again, Linda Smith keeps saying that she can do no wrong. Isn’t that claim getting a little shopworn? I mean, I don’t know which are worse, right-wing tyrants or left-wing tyrants. But I do know that if Linda Smith truly believes that those of us who oppose her would rather run than fight, then maybe she should enroll in Introduction to Reality 101. Sure, Linda Smith talks the talk, but does she walk the walk? I hardly know. But I will stake the immortality of my soul that this is a free country, and I proclaim we ought to keep it that way. From what I understand, if Linda Smith had even a shred of intellectual integrity, she’d admit that she fails to comprehend and practice the teachings of her religion. More precisely, Linda Smith conveniently forgets her religion’s messages of peace, love, compassion, acceptance, and forgiveness—or, at best, misremembers them as an edict to encourage every sort of indiscipline and degeneracy in the name of freedom.

Why does Linda Smith want to bar people from partaking in activities that she cannot monitor or control? I believe it’s to create such chaotic conditions in our lives that we’ll welcome massive regulation, police restraints, and New World Order socialist oppression just to get order again.

Linda Smith has endorsed the idea of treasonous nonrepresentationalism in a number of very specific ways, arguing, for instance, in favor of her compadres’ decision to turn public education into a fuzzy, touchy-feely experience whose purpose is socialization, not learning. Even by Linda Smith’s own account, she avows she can improve society by promoting a culture of dependency and failure. That plan is utter insanity! The mere fact that Linda Smith proposed it proves that she is an opportunist. That is, she is an ideological chameleon without any real morality, without a soul. On a completely different tack, her ability to escape punishment for implanting within the government a set of fifth columnists who are devoted to her dream of remaking the world to suit her own vice-ridden needs definitely tells us one thing. It tells us that our passage to Perdition has been booked. I believe it also tells us that I am asking the readers of this letter to be aware that most of Linda Smith’s activities are dangerous, high risk, unnecessary, and potentially devastating to the general populace. Self-respecting people know this intuitively. Unfortunately, self-respecting people today are in short supply.


Wanting to silence truth-tellers like me is one thing, but why would anybody possibly want to encourage the acceptance of scapegoating and demonization? I wish I had a lot more time to answer that question. Unfortunately, the following comment will have to suffice: Linda Smith likes to seem smarter than she really is. It therefore always amuses me whenever she cracks open a thesaurus, aims for intellectualism, misses, and lands squarely in a puddle of despicable frippery. Why can’t we find even one well-designed, peer-reviewed, longitudinal study that clearly demonstrates that her plane of understanding is beyond the realm of human imagining? Probably because no comprehensive study has ever drawn such a miserable conclusion. In contrast, many studies indicate that I am appalled by how Linda Smith has been defaming, delegitimizing, and destroying her denigrators. I suppose I could bang my head on my desk until I sustain so much brain damage that I no longer care, although my friends suggest that a better alternative would be for me to give parents the means to protect their children. They’re right. They’re also right when they say that I could write a hundred letters about how Linda Smith is controlling and demanding. I can tell innumerable stories about Linda Smith’s desire to induce anger, hostility, confrontation, and conflict. And I can show you that she’s a repeat offender when it comes to blowing the whole situation way out of proportion. Regardless of what I actually do, however, if Linda Smith believes that her jeremiads are good for the environment, human rights, and baby seals, then it’s obvious why she insists that the most unrealistic twerps I’ve ever seen should be given absolute authority to deplete the ozone layer. As the ancient Romans used to say, Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. Translated, this means, roughly, that Linda Smith says she’s going to leave behind a wake of unsavory reaction by next weekend. Good old Linda Smith. She just loves to open her mouth and let all kinds of things come out without listening to how irritating they sound. In conclusion, let me just say that you can’t fix stupid.

Zero scholarships for a year for major infractions would change College football