39 thoughts on “USC v. UCLA Tweet Of Day

  1. Did KSPN 710AM fire Ireland? He’s been a USC fan since the day he was hired there.

    • He ‘may’ act as a USC fan but he’s a ucla alum with that lantern jaw line of his. He’s actually fairly objective.

  2. Yes they did win 8 in a row. Many of them were heartbreaking losses. It was loss after loss. But if we look at the overall success of UGLY in that period they didn’t win any Rose Bowls, No National Championships, no top 10 finishes. The 8 year skid hurt but UGLY didn’t do much damage.

    • the radio voice of the Lakers, heavy hitter for ESPN, beloved CBS sports anchor, this dude has major street cred!!!

      Helen, you remind me of the opposition to the Common Core Initiative!! you can’t block the truth just becuase you find it embarrassing or inconvenient!!

      Science is real!! most people love it when it allows them to read the wolfman’s blog on their phone while sitting in the can at work!! but some get all mad when Evolution is taught!!

      America is the greatest country in the world!! but it was founded by racist slave-owning hypocrites who were BRILLIANT in other ways!!!



      • Street cred? That’s so funny that’s it’s ridiculous. Street credit is Tom Kelly and Pete Arbogast. They’ve actually witnessed greatness from the teams they have followed. The great players they’ve been around. Classic games they called. Championships they celebrated to. That’s street cred!

      • So, Charlie, what actual empirical evidence do you have of Life arising apart from the same kind of life (or its programs)?

        “Evolution” (the way you mean it) — Darwin’s creation myth — is nothing but atheistic-naturalism-as-scientific-fact. It’s Gaia in a lab coat.

        As for the Founding Fathers, a few were racists — that’s why a portion of the Declaration explicitly denouncing the king of England as a slaver had to be removed before ratification — but if you’re referring to Washington, Jefferson, or Henry, you couldn’t be more wrong.

        You do realize that slavery was ubiquitous in the ancient world? That it ended solely because of Christianity? That America’s Founders worked to end slavery?

        George Washington declared:

        “I wish from my soul that the legislature of this state could see the
        policy of a gradual abolition of slavery. It would prevent much

        “… No man desires more heartily than I do [the end of slavery]. Not only
        do I pray for it on the score of human dignity, but I can clearly
        foresee that nothing but the rooting out of slavery can perpetuate the
        existence of our union.”

        “The unfortunate condition of the persons whose labour in part I
        employed, has been the only unavoidable subject of regret. To make the
        Adults among them as easy & comfortable in their circumstances as
        their actual state of ignorance and improvidence would admit; and to lay
        a foundation to prepare the rising generation for a destiny different
        from that in which they were born, afforded some satisfaction to my
        mind, and could not I hoped be displeasing to the justice of the


        • Santiago, there are FIGURATIVE mountains of evidence supporting evolution!! in fact, just the other day we discovered deep sea bacteria that did not change in billions of years…..EXACTLY what is predicted by Darwin’s model: where there is no change in environment, there should be no evolution of species.

          science does not have to conflict with religious beliefs, hopefully Evangelicals will embrace this sentiment.

          as for your attempt to excuse our founding fathers, 200yrs ago is not “ancient History” and the fact that they fully acknowledged and understood how obscene slavery was AND DID NOTHING TO CHANGE THIS when they had the chance, is MORE incriminating.

          • Charlie, everything is “EXACTLY what is predicted by Darwin’s model,” whether or not it actually predicts it.

            Tautologies work that way.

            Genetic mutations alone should have caused changes in that bacteria; the “environment” (Natural Selection) works on the existing genetic code to “reward” some over others.

            What about Coelacanth? A fish that, according to scientists, died out with the dinosaurs 75 million years ago — and of which we have fossil remains dating back (allegedly) 100 million years ago — has been found unchanged and alive.

            Are you going to claim that its environment was unchanged, too?

            And Darwin’s finches? Though — by one rather clumsy, inapt, or dishonest use of the term — a different “species” of finch, they’re still just finches. And Lenski’s E. coli. After decades and thousands of generations of “evolution,” they’re still just bacteria.

            So, Charlie, have you ever seen Life arise apart from the same kind of life (or its programs)?

            As for the Founders, your comments betray your historical illiteracy (or perhaps a resistance to dealing with uncomfortable facts): The Founders were born into a world in which slavery was the norm.

            They worked to change that. They risked everything in creating Liberty.

          • if your scientific beliefs are rooted in contrary spiritual teachings, then i respect that. (I don’t judge, helll, i worship Satan!)

            but please don’t try to paint slave owning founding fathers (who were fully aware of the depravity of their actions) to be anything other than very brave, smart, patriotic…racists (by definition!).

          • I’m asking you to address the issue of Origins on purely empirical and logical grounds.

            What in any of the statements I provided is “racist,” especially in light of the ubiquity of slavery? Can you produce any statements from those men that are “racist”?

            You are aware that the racist component of American slavery developed over time as a justification for its continuation, and that these men worked against it, aren’t you?

          • Empirical grounds? like i said the fossil, biological, chemical, geographical and genetic evidence is manifest…..no serious scientist disputes evolution any more than they do the heliocentric nature of the solar system.

            if you wish to deny that slave owners are by definition racist, show me some Founding Fathers who had White slaves and that might help to support your very shaky argument.

            i suppose some Nazi sympathizers (like Southerns Cal’s own Dean Cromwell) could also argue that not all Nazi’s were anti-Semitic. How about only the Leaders??

            Santiago, i just want you to go on the record: are you a Southern Cal graduate?

          • Charlie, argumentum ad verecundiam is a poor place in which to place your confidence. Groupthink has never determined truth.

            Your “empirical grounds” are assumed lines of descent based on observed similarities.

            Fossils are evidence only that something was alive once, and now it’s dead. It doesn’t tell us how it sounded, what color it was, what it liked to do with its free time, nor who its parents were.

            And thing about the rest of what your belief system requires: Living, Von Neumann-type metabolic machines more complex than anything Man can devise arises all the time by accident. Not only that, but newer and more complex genetic program, structure, and function arising continually by only random, natural processes.

            Have you observed any of that, ever?

            (Of course not. Your coreligionists make the point over-and-over-and-over again that no one has ever seen, can see it now, nor will ever see it in the future. They’re demanding that we just trust them.)

            So, again, have you ever seen Life arise apart from the same kind of Life (or its programs)? What do you know is actually true about Darwin’s creation myth?

          • Why is it so important to you where Santiago attended school, CB?……Are you gearing up for an “Ah, HA!” moment?……are you going to order a Code Red on Santiago?…..

          • so may i infer you are a “creationist” […]?

            Should read, “I’m not really able to reply on substance, so I’d like to try ad hominem instead.”

            Charlie, have you observed Life arise apart from life (and its programs)?

          • Don’t use argumentum ad verecundiam if you don’t know what it really means. Bucket is citing what the overwhelming majority of scientists have studied and believe. If you want to call their consensus “groupthink” that’s your issue.

            I don’t think you understand how long evolution (per natural selection) takes and, relatedly, how short a human life is.

          • Don’t use argumentum ad verecundiam if you don’t know what it really means […] If you want to call their consensus “groupthink” that’s your issue […] I don’t think you understand how long evolution (per natural selection) takes […].

            You’re wrong to imply that scientists are infallible, unbiased, and unanimous. They’re human beings prone to the same errors, laziness, coercion, and wishful thinking that the rest of us are.

            And my identification of the fallacy is apropos (even using your particular definition): Most scientists endorsing Darwin’s creation myth are not experts in biology, and none of them have ever witnessed Life arise apart from the same kind of life (or its programs).

            One definition of Argumentum ad verecundiam states that “authorities can come to the wrong judgments through error, bias, dishonesty, or falling prey to groupthink.”


            And you’re unthinkingly regurgitating the propaganda you’ve been fed: Natural Selection works only on preexisting code, and it depends on genetic mutations to have any variety from which to “choose.”

            With that, you’ve got two serious problems: First, genetic mutations usually harm or kill an organism; you’re arguing that a mechanism which typically causes suffering and death is responsible for newer and more complex genetic program, structure, and function. Second, no one’s ever seen occur what you claim has happened continually around the world for eons, no one can see it now, and no one will see it, ever.

            The only thing more absurd than your demand that others “just trust you” is your uncritical gullibility in the first place.

            Again, betomas, what do you know is true about Darwin’s creation myth?

        • Thanks for the quotes by Patrick Henry on the hypocrisy and cruelty of Christians towards slaves.

          It’s ridiculous that you refuse to believe in evolution. Is that what they taught you over there?


    • He’s riding high while he can – hey, kudos, they won 3 straight. Pretty easily, actually. He should feel good about it. But the immovable force is coming, and Ireland knows it. Sadly for the Bruins, they couldn’t convert any of those three wins into a National Championship like SC did during our 7 straight over the Bruins. Come to think of it, they never even won the conference with these teams. But yes, they’ve won 3 straight – and they deserve their due. Trojans want those rivalry victories, but they also want the higher goals. Conf/Nat Titles.

      • Lamont, you big Dummy!!!

        you sound like a 3rd grader!!!

        “winning 3 in a row is pretty easy, we couldda done it but we just didn’t FEEL like it!”


      • Good stuff LamontRaymond.

        I might add that SC will certainly be favored in 2015 at the coliseum with a senior quarterback against a new SUCLA quarterback.

  3. Was southern cal on sanctions during the 8 game losing streak too? What was the excuse back then?

  4. Coaching over talent, wins the crosstown rival every single year, which is why UCLA will continue the streak.

      • Most fans on this site don’t like me being a realist, but once the smoke clears the truth usually comes out. I gave my opinion about Lane Kifin for 2 years on this site, and I received negative inbox messages, but guess what ? he was fired!! Steve Sarkisian has ZERO leadership skills, and will be exposed after next season. Can you imagine Nick Saban, and Urban Meyer text messaging their Athletic Director to come down to the side lines to settle a dispute with a referee , like Sarkisian did ? lmao Thats what you call “WEAK LEADERSHIP SKILLS”.

        • I’ve got to agree with you. And I remember you called it on LK. Sark is not a good coach. No excuses if he can’t win with all the talent he now has.

  5. It is hilarious and adorable that that bruin fans think beating a shorthanded SC team under sanctions counts as anything. The local recruits, however, are smarter and know better.

    • Remember they ruins enjoyed similar success in ’82-84 when SC was under similar sanctions so they know their window of opportunity is closing. Incoming recruits Rodney Peete and Todd Marinovich restored things to their proper order from 85-90 (4-1).

Comments are closed.