Seems like you know a thing or two about idiotic opinions.

Total guess, but I’m gonna say that as opposed to Trump simply making it up, it could be a hoax. I can see Trump being incredibly gullible.

That was my first takeaway as well... someone report that man for soliciting child pornography immediately!

You’ve used a lot of words and statistics to respond to a joke, so maybe Adderall?

I disagree with your actual last sentence.

Spare us, please.

I love how badly that backfired on her.

Palm Beach is already on an island...

I think the word you’re looking for would be “catalog” or maybe “index”. A ledger is generally used in the context of accounting.

With all the sports to choose from he’s got some tough competition, but I think he’s certainly in the running. I know he annoys some people but I just don’t get it - I love the varied vocabulary, especially since he always seems to find the perfect descriptor for the play. And I love how excited he gets - if I’ve had…

Agreed completely - you can’t afford them the full legal rights of a human without also giving them the responsibilities of a human, which is absurd, given that they’re not humans and couldn’t interact in human society. We may need more/better laws to protect them, but this isn't the answer.

You seem angry. And a bit irrational. And a bit scientifically confused.

Because of the way the law works in New York, the judge may have been following legal protocol...

Very mature of you to ban me, when I haven't used abusive language or been abusive in any way, and clearly had the same read as most of your audience. But sure, go ahead.

You're trying to backtrack, but your words can be found in the article above. You wrote:

You're being extremely disingenuous and I think you know that. You're essentially saying "I'm not explicitly saying he's a bad guy, but let me tell you all these things that are really bad that he does that make him a bad guy. But I'm not saying he's a bad guy, I swear! Also, he could do all these crazy and…

I don’t understand your argument at all anymore - in your reply to my other thread you explicitly advocated the stand on principle / blaze of glory that you’re now claiming not to advocate for. So which is it?

There’s nothing admirable about going out in a blaze of glory, or taking a stand on principle, when the results of that will be entirely negative for the people you’re trying to help. It’s naive and foolish, not admirable.

Albert, I usually love your stuff, but you’re living in a fantasy world on this one. The NCAA would come down on him just as hard as it has come down on everyone who challenges it. Do you really, really think that the NCAA would hesitate for even a second to ban him because of “public opinion”? When have they cared…

How would that help anyone? You're advocating a stand on principle that would just lead to players getting more exploited than they already are - that's not a productive way to operate.