carolinablue232
Player Valuation: £70m
Lol yes. Gotta get all the plastic bags while you still can apparently!My personal highlight was the bag on the board - wtf??!! lol
Lol yes. Gotta get all the plastic bags while you still can apparently!My personal highlight was the bag on the board - wtf??!! lol
Quite probably, yes.Thanks. For 1, does the constitutional amendment thing to both ways with the 23rd needing to be repealed?
UCLA undergrad and Harvard JD. You don’t get near Harvard Law admittance without proving your intelligence.He's a clueless dweeb imo
Cant see it happening thenQuite probably, yes.
Being intelligent doesn't exclude cluelessness (and highly likely includes dweeb)UCLA undergrad and Harvard JD. You don’t get near Harvard Law admittance without proving your intelligence.
You keep making this claim and it's been shared with you on multiple occasions (and you've read these comments, I'm fairly certain, as you've "liked" them) that the appeal to dismiss based on Waters' comments was rejected by the trial judge and Biden's comments were made while the jury was sequestered - so they didn't hear them.
Being upset that politicians can't keep their yaps shut is fine, Pete. However, it's nothing new in big cases with political/societal weight. Please find me a trial like the Chauvin case where comments by a POTUS caused a mistrial or reversal on appeal.
I do not know this moron's backstory, but yeah, you do. You just need to be legacy and have money.UCLA undergrad and Harvard JD. You don’t get near Harvard Law admittance without proving your intelligence.
I never said it was fine, Pete. It's, as I said previously, intemperate and really should be avoided. But they are politicians and, by definition, have gaping pie holes that never close.Sorry, I’m obviously commenting from a U.K. view. In the U.K. this would not be tolerated. If you are saying it’s fine for US politicians to comment and wind up the populace regarding the outcome of a murder trial then I can only accept your comment.....
Ok sure, if you’d like to highlight the 2 or 3 out of their classes of 550+ that might get in that way that’s fine. Overall their LSATs, GPAs, and extracurriculars are the best of the best so not sure why you’d focus on a percent of a percent to try and make your point.I do not know this moron's backstory, but yeah, you do. You just need to be legacy and have money.
I was being flippant.Ok sure, if you’d like to highlight the 2 or 3 out of their classes of 550+ that might get in that way that’s fine. Overall their LSATs, GPAs, and extracurriculars are the best of the best so not sure why you’d focus on a percent of a percent to try and make your point.
Haha ok fine. And I’d argue that while imperfect, you can’t be stupid and have those measurements, or at best it’d be extremely rare to do so.I was being flippant.
However, I will pedantically argue that those fields are measurements of success in the American education system, not intelligence.
So...I don't even really wholly disagree, but it's been a week and I feel like getting on my horse for a moment.Haha ok fine. And I’d argue that while imperfect, you can’t be stupid and have those measurements, or at best it’d be extremely rare to do so.
UCLA undergrad and Harvard JD. You don’t get near Harvard Law admittance without proving your intelligence.
I never meant to indicate the bolded above was the case. Some of it is circumstance, some of it is choice, some of it is opportunity, and so on. You’re also absolutely right about different kinds of intelligence, and I 100% think emotional intelligence is one of the most important things someone can have. Most don’t.So...I don't even really wholly disagree, but it's been a week and I feel like getting on my horse for a moment.
I think we are far too quick to label people 'stupid' or 'intelligent' as though it is a binary state. Some people are smart about some things while being legendary fools about other stuff.
We often conflate "intelligent" with "traditionally successful from a Western economic perspective". But that really DOES NOT measure the functioning capability of someone's mental processes.
Being a good lawyer doesn't mean you're smart.
And flipping burgers doesn't make you stupid.
We also do not give enough credit for things that do not traditionally have financial value when measuring 'intelligence'. Being able to read a room, or empathize are all elements of one's mind and personality.
Basically, all of this is a way to argue:
"Stupid is as stupid does, and Ben Shapiro does stupid things, so I don't care about his qualifications?"
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.