In remembrance of 9/11/01



Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Nov 20th, 2017, 5:43pm EST

Home Home Help Help Search Search Members Members GamesGames Login Login Register Register
Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic:  Politics

"Welcome to 'the Gridiron'... Fantasy football at its best!"

Fantasy Football News Feed Co-commissioner Services Add "the Gridiron" to your site
Lend a hand... Make a donation to "the Gridiron"!!!
   Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron
   the Gridiron
   the Sidelines
(Moderators: Replay Official, Side Judge, Line Judge, Umpire, Head Linesman, Back Judge, Field Judge, Referee)
   G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic:  Politics
No topic|Next topic
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 22 23  24 Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic:  Politics  (Read 52344 times)
DB
Fantasy Field General
GBRFLer
Champ - '95, '98, '08, '09, '10, '13, '15
*****
# 22



7X Ultimate Supreme Champion

   
View Profile

Posts: 682

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #500 on: Jul 13th, 2013, 12:09pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I don't know what the specific arguments are except to say that everyone believes in their side.  If the media is bias it is to make $.
 
As far as different reactions based on different scenarios, you are probably correct.  I would imagine that the mob you refer to would argue that they have been persecuted for many years.  With that said, any violent reaction either way is senseless.
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #501 on: Jul 13th, 2013, 4:36pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Jul 13th, 2013, 12:09pm, DB wrote:
I don't know what the specific arguments are except to say that everyone believes in their side. If the media is bias it is to make $.

 
Well, that just pushes the proverbial bulge in the carpet.  It just raises the question (not that you have to answer it, D; indeed, the answer is a dissertation), how is it that we have become so attracted to leftist-leaning media and entertainment?
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #502 on: Jul 14th, 2013, 1:34am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Mind you, DD, I ask you the following with no opinion of my own of Zimmerman as a person. Indeed, while talking with my mom, with whom I am of like mind about the case, I had to set her straight and counter her when she started to go too far in her advocacy and say things like how Zimmerman seemed like a decent guy who was just watching out for his neighborhood and so on. I reminded her that we do not know what kind of person he is in real life, that he could be a pompous jerk,... or not, but that none of that matters. It is not about whether or not (you think) you like the guy.
 
on Jul 9th, 2013, 7:35pm, DirkDiggler wrote:
On a personal note, I can not wait to see what happems to Zimmerman . By the letter of the law, it seems he may get away with it. In my opinion, he is a guilty muther who deserves to go to prison. He NEVER should of been in that position, carrying a gun.

 
SO, with it stated up front that I have no love loss for Zimmerman and, indeed, disabused my own mother regarding her immoderate considerations as to who he is as a person, I ask you the following, of course, under the assumption that you do not know the guy personally... How did you arrive at this opinion of him as a person? There is definitely some vitriol and cynicism in your words.
 
Might it be able to be suggested, especially since you admit that you do NOT watch MSNBC (or CNN), that you might want to calmly and contemplatively reflect on the media sources that you consult and that contributed to the formation of the type of opinion you ended up having!? Or, am I just way off base? (However, I know that is the process I had to put myself through.)
 
Extreme case in point of what I am talking about, what NBC did with the doctoring of that initial 911 call from Zimmerman was over-the-top manipulative and, thus, somewhat evil in the sense that it served only to fit a political narrative that pits citizen against citizen along the lines of race!
« Last Edit: Jul 14th, 2013, 1:36am by Stegfucius » Logged
DirkDiggler
Gridiron Great
GBRFLer
Champ - '14
*****
# 5





   
View Profile

Posts: 3117

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #503 on: Jul 14th, 2013, 10:52pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Jul 14th, 2013, 1:34am, StegRock wrote:
Mind you, DD, I ask you the following with no opinion of my own of Zimmerman as a person. Indeed, while talking with my mom, with whom I am of like mind about the case, I had to set her straight and counter her when she started to go too far in her advocacy and say things like how Zimmerman seemed like a decent guy who was just watching out for his neighborhood and so on. I reminded her that we do not know what kind of person he is in real life, that he could be a pompous jerk,... or not, but that none of that matters. It is not about whether or not (you think) you like the guy.
 
 
SO, with it stated up front that I have no love loss for Zimmerman and, indeed, disabused my own mother regarding her immoderate considerations as to who he is as a person, I ask you the following, of course, under the assumption that you do not know the guy personally... How did you arrive at this opinion of him as a person? There is definitely some vitriol and cynicism in your words.
 
Might it be able to be suggested, especially since you admit that you do NOT watch MSNBC (or CNN), that you might want to calmly and contemplatively reflect on the media sources that you consult and that contributed to the formation of the type of opinion you ended up having!? Or, am I just way off base? (However, I know that is the process I had to put myself through.)
 
Extreme case in point of what I am talking about, what NBC did with the doctoring of that initial 911 call from Zimmerman was over-the-top manipulative and, thus, somewhat evil in the sense that it served only to fit a political narrative that pits citizen against citizen along the lines of race!

 
 
Well, there is a TON of information on the case. I watched the news, read articles, and yes, even OCCASSIONALLY watched CNN, HLN, blah blah blah. How could you NOT see it somewhere.  
 
My point is this, I figured he would get off a legal term. BUT, he was guilty of being a complete fucking moron. Why would you follow the guy when the police specifically told you not to? Why would you have a gun? Why put yourself in that position?  
 
But how is he guilty IN MY OPINION and should have to go to prison? He SHOT a guy that he did not have to shoot if he just would of stayed away from him. He did NOT have to follow him. He was TOLD not to follow him.  
 
In regards to it being a racial issue, by appearances, it appears he was following because he was black. If it was a white teenager in a hoody, would he of followed him? I do not think any of us know....and no one can say definitively. However, so many African Americans have been "guilty of being black" that they are more sensitive to it. And no mater how hard we deny it, racism still exists in our county. And "guilty of being black" refers to be followed in stores, pulled over for no reason, getting looks, etc. It happens. It happened to a good friend of mine (who works for the DEA) a little over a year ago.  
 
And since I am not black, I can never truly put myself in their shoes. But I understand the sensitivity around it. ANd I am not sure it is a 'fabrication' by the media...... the media just happens to be reporting on it. But I will acknowledge the media is looking for a story where there really isn't one. For example, our local news station led the news with REACTION FROM THE STREETS - like there was going to be a riot or something. Yet there was nothing.....
 
Speaking of race, I do find it amusing that most DC natives and football fans are totally discounting the AMerican Indians objecting to the Redskins name. I just do not get it. ANd while people can say it is a  
positive' iimage, we are not American Indians. AND historically, the first time the team name REDSKINS was used, it was in a negative commutation via stereotype. Just change the fucking name already.
 
Finally, I always ask myself with dealing with racism or the PERCEPTION of racism....What would of been different if the roles were reversed?
« Last Edit: Jul 14th, 2013, 11:00pm by DirkDiggler » Logged

"Every rule has an exception....the exception can't become the rule"
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #504 on: Jul 16th, 2013, 7:31am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Wow, there is so much there to sift through... I am going to engage on two particular points as concisely as possible...
 
on Jul 14th, 2013, 10:52pm, DirkDiggler wrote:
However, so many African Americans have been "guilty of being black" that they are more sensitive to it. And no mater how hard we deny it, racism still exists in our count[r]y.

 
This is the claptrap of the leftist race profiteers, which we are being deluded with A TON of right now... At any rate, acknowledging but setting aside any question begging about whether or not the absolute eradication of racism in the world is even possible, yet again DD, you tendentiously, though perhaps unwittingly, speak in absolute terms about a topic for which there are no absolute terms. The manifestation of racism in America is not either-or. It is a matter of degree! Of course, the leftist race profiteers want to play down racial progress when it contradicts their race baiting. At those times, like now, they opt to speak in terms of, if you will, "black and white" (double entendre intended). Their modus operandi, however, is grounded in "ill-logic" because they do want to point out progress when it comes to proclaiming the effectiveness of entitlement programs and affirmative action. Logically, either the entitlements have worked and there has been progress or there has not been progress and the entitlements have not worked. Of course, they "ill-logically" want to claim that entitlements have worked or that there has been no progress depending on what they are fighting for at any given moment.
 
BUT, there has been progress, great progress! This is not America circa 1960 or 1860. Indeed, despite the ridiculously erroneous and tendential comparisons being made by the lefties, the DIFFERENCES in the cases of Emmett Till and Trayvon Martin clearly demonstrate the progress we have made. At the very least, have we not come to a time when the black community would be well-advised to turn inward and consider what role they play in the perpetuation of racism? Mind you, I especially ask you this because, as you roundaboutly suggest, at not just the proverbial but the literal end of the day, blacks are the only ones who can proclaim us free of racism towards blacks because they are the only ones who "experience" it. I mean something has got to give then on their end if that (relativist bullshit) is really the case. Or, maybe overcoming racism is not the goal of the race profiteers. But, I digress. Quite the contrary, any black person from Bill Cosby to Michael Nutter (link) who encourages self-critique in the black community is ignored or demonized, and lashing black conservatives is a rite of passage into the modern democrat party. Meanwhile, we have an administration that thinks we (whites) are "cowards" (yes, that is what Holder meant). They obviously do not look in the mirror (double entendre intended), and they obviously do not have a clue even by proxy of what it is like to live in a racially homogenous country. But, I digress. Anyway, any merit to the question I ask, or am I just a ? How do you take a piece like Negrophilia by Eric Rush (link)?
 
Quote:
Finally, I always ask myself with dealing with racism or the PERCEPTION of racism....What would [have] been different if the roles were reversed?

 
That question, in essence, is the same silly, race-baiting question that gets us nowhere and that was asked by some dumb reporter at the news conference after the trial. She asked, if the races were reversed -- Trayvon was "white" and Zimmerman was black -- do you think the verdict would have been not guilty? (Can anybody say, "O.J. Simpson," anyway...) That question is not challenging. Quite the contrary, it is leading, especially when it is asked of the defense for whom it is impossible to answer in a way that will satisfy the questioner. Meanwhile, the question to ask to get at the valid point related to this line of inquiry is the one I posed...
 
on Jul 12th, 2013, 11:14pm, StegRock wrote:
Bottom, bottom line, if all the facts of this case and what we know based on what has been presented were exactly the same but the roles were reversed, that is, that it was, again all things equal, Trayvon Martin in his late 20's who took the life of a teenage George Zimmerman, would the same people protesting now for "justice for Trayvon" in the form of demanding Zimmerman's conviction not be protesting for "justice for Trayvon" in the form of demanding Trayvon's acquittal?

 
But, anyway, if you are to remain consistent in your position about this situation, DD, your question to yourself here can only have one (type of) answer. So, with that said, what is your answer to your own question? (You state that you ask this question of yourself, I am sure, to demonstrate fairmindedness and level-headedness when, in fact, quite the contrary, it serves to illustrate how you have painted yourself into an ideological corner based on the position you have taken here and, moreover, how you have decided to take it.)
 


Finally, I know you were thinking about getting away from the Dirk Diggler's theme last season. Would you like me to change your username (as it appears on the site) to Reverend Al?
« Last Edit: Jul 16th, 2013, 4:42pm by Stegfucius » Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #505 on: Jul 19th, 2013, 8:22am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

So, this congressman who pulled the hoodie theatrics on the floor of the Capitol on Monday says how there should have been a black man, like himself, on the jury because he would have been able to bring to the table the experience and sensibility of a black man. That is RELATIVISM, and it is destroying our country! Of course, that is precisely NOT what a juror is supposed to do. Trying someone is NOT supposed to be about YOUR experience. It is not supposed to be about YOU. It is supposed to be about the case at hand and the circumstances and facts surrounding it. But, let us not let details get in the way. He surely is not.
 
So, as if the fundamentals of our system of justice were a trivial matter, we will set THAT aside. The bigger problem is the fundamental irrationality and unreasonableness of his position, that is to say, his relativism. Relativism is insidious and, quite LITERALLY, divisive, and its ill-logic is intractable! The logic underlying the claim that a black man should have been on the jury because he would have contributed his experiences and mindset as a black man to the verdict is the SAME logic that says that he, precisely because he is a black man, cannot judge Zimmerman's mindset, that is, the mindset that emerged out of the experiences of a "white"-hispanic. Think it through! It is a contradiction! The reason being given for having a black guy on the jury is, based on the logic of that reason, a reason why having a black guy on the jury cannot work. The latter is, of course, ridiculous because a black man is capable of being objective. Being subjective is precisely what a juror is NOT supposed to do, right?  Yet, that is precisely the basis of the argument of the aforesaid congressman and many other talking heads right now.  Meanwhile, our system is designed to try to evoke objectivity and overcome subjectivity.  Amid all this, the aforementioned contradiction gets elided because the logic is not being applied back on oneself.
 
However, you cannot just have it one way, that is, without our eventually devolving into the so-called "moral" sense that relativism leads to, namely, "might makes right". Think it through! This is the "logic" of the race baiters and profiteers, which has been adopted by Double D right here, and of anybody trying to justify themselves on either the individual or community level. Take a stand! Argue for your position, but NOT with this pernicious, divisive and destructive ill-logic! There is an argument for why having a black man on the jury might have been a good thing, but it ain't any of this claptrap with which we are presently being deluded.
 
We have become so accustomed to this ill-logic, but, whenever you think during a conversation that someone is not being objective and being too subjective and that that is not a good thing, know that that is the vestige of our sense for this ill-logic. We are losing this sense because relativism, a.k.a. subjectivism, moreover, emotions-based relativism has seeped into American society so deeply. Untying the intellectual and psychological knots of this deep-seated ill-logic is laborious, indeed, but it is also liberating for it is an awakening from unconsciousness.
 
Remember "ill-logical" reverse racists want you to feel what they feel. But,... wait... That defies their very own logic that we cannot feel what they feel. Or, wait a minute... Can we... in a different more direct way? And, isn't that what this and O.J. and Tavis Smiley's bellicose suggested solution to race relations in America that the NRA give out guns to all blacks is really all about? For the reverse-racist race baiters it is about making whites feel what they feel... in the only way possible according to their logic, and it ain't empathy. Their logic undermines empathy. Think it through, please!  The line between justice and revenge is very fine, indeed.
« Last Edit: Jul 19th, 2013, 8:30am by Stegfucius » Logged
DirkDiggler
Gridiron Great
GBRFLer
Champ - '14
*****
# 5





   
View Profile

Posts: 3117

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #506 on: Jul 19th, 2013, 9:22pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

What I find interesting is you take my post out and  start grouping me in with the leftist nuts.   People on BOTH sides go way to far.  
 
I went away from the Zimmerman trial and started to talk about racism and WHY black folks are more sensitive about the trial.   Candidly, I think Obama kind of said the same thing today.....  blacks are followed in stores, people are nervous when a black man approaches, etc.....   If you had to deal with that everyday, wouldn't you be more sensitive to it?   While America is way better off than in the past, people are naive if they think racism is dead.   (and I will grant you the arguement of reverse racism).  We ALL have our personal prejudices- no matter how small or large they may be.  
 
Changing subjects....I accept In the eyes of the court, Zimmerman was proven innocent based on the stand your ground laws in Florida.   I PERSONALLY Have a hard time accepting the fact that if you follow someone WITH A GUN who is not doing anything, and you kill them, you are not guilty of anything.  Seems like our system is a little fucked up.   But again, I accept it and am moving on.  
 
Logged

"Every rule has an exception....the exception can't become the rule"
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #507 on: Jul 19th, 2013, 10:08pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Jul 19th, 2013, 8:22am, StegRock wrote:
... because the logic is not being applied back on oneself.

 
Indeed, relativists, if they are to remain consistent with their relativism, canNOT apply their logic to themselves. Think it through! Relativism naturally tends toward solipsism.
 
on Jul 19th, 2013, 9:22pm, DirkDiggler wrote:
What I find interesting is you take my post out and start grouping me in with the leftist nuts.

 
That is because of the leftist-style vitriol and cynicism of your initial post and, much more importantly, (if you have not picked up on it) because that is the logic you are employing.
 
Quote:
People on BOTH sides go way to far.

 
This is the kind of overgeneralization that obfuscates and quashes (an appreciation of) nuance and deeper levels of analysis.
 
Quote:
Candidly, I think Obama kind of said the same thing today..... blacks are followed in stores, people are nervous when a black man approaches, etc..... ... While America is way better off than in the past, people are naive if they think racism is dead. (and I will grant you the arguement of reverse racism).

 
on Jul 16th, 2013, 7:31am, StegRock wrote:
BUT, there has been progress, great progress! This is not America circa 1960 or 1860. Indeed, despite the ridiculously erroneous and tendential comparisons being made by the lefties, the DIFFERENCES in the cases of Emmett Till and Trayvon Martin clearly demonstrate the progress we have made. At the very least, have we not come to a time when the black community would be well-advised to turn inward and consider what role they play in the perpetuation of racism?
« Last Edit: Jul 19th, 2013, 10:10pm by Stegfucius » Logged
IbdFunk
Fantasy Field General
GBRFLer
Champ - '97, '00, '01, '11
*****
# 12



No Vaseline for you!

   
View Profile

Posts: 524

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #508 on: Jul 20th, 2013, 6:22pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Who cares... Warner, you better be worrying about not finishing 3rd since you didnt make that deal with me. I know you think you have a championship team this year, but im calling it now, 3rd place.. You better make some moves if you want to get over the hump, your time is running out.
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #509 on: Jul 20th, 2013, 11:06pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Jul 20th, 2013, 6:22pm, IbdFunk wrote:
Who cares... Warner, you better be worrying about not finishing 3rd since you didnt make that deal with me. I know you think you have a championship team this year, but im calling it now, 3rd place.. You better make some moves if you want to get over the hump, your time is running out.

 
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #510 on: Jul 22nd, 2013, 9:08pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I am using short excerpts of DD's posts here, but my message is general, not just to him.
 
on Jul 14th, 2013, 10:52pm, DirkDiggler wrote:
And "guilty of being black" refers to be followed in stores, pulled over for no reason, getting looks, etc. It happens.

 
on Jul 19th, 2013, 9:22pm, DirkDiggler wrote:
Candidly, I think Obama kind of said the same thing today..... blacks are followed in stores, people are nervous when a black man approaches, etc..... If you had to deal with that everyday, wouldn't you be more sensitive to it?

 
I am becoming somewhat less sympathetic the more I hear our leaders, whether it is Barack Obama, Eric Holder or Michael Steele, speak about their own experiences. Have you never been eyed by security in stores, pulled over for no reason, gotten "looks", (or per the aforementioned trio) tailed by a cop, asked by a security or police officer why you are where you are, been looked at apprehensively by a female clutching her purse (black females included, by the way), etc.? I sure have! I tend only to shave when I have to and, as a young guy, I frequently wore sweats, though I know I have had these experiences notwithstanding those factors.
 
In any case, a young Steg, the summer between freshman and sophomore year of college, was cruising in my seriously hoop-dee Oldsmobile Omega with my buddy DT (a GBRFLer, who could attest to this story) when we were pulled over by police on the Garden State Parkway in broad daylight for no good reason. We were totally hassled, a second/third police cruiser shows up, hands on the trunk, patted down, car thoroughly gone through. I was extremely nervous throughout, and that, I am sure, showed, but, nevertheless, very compliant. I showed just a little sarcasm/balkiness only once with respect to something they found in my car that they thought was something it was not. In any event, in the end, no citation, but also no explanation. Point being, that is just one fewer tale from youth than the two Holder cited.
 
MIND YOU, I am not saying that young black men do not have it somewhat worse (saying "everyday", though, as DD does, to me is hyperbole that is more indicative of how sensitive whites have been trained to be on the issue than of the full reality of the matter). That said, when I am getting the "look" by a security guard in a store, though surely uncomfortable about it, I swallow my pride and chalk it up to the guard's doing his or her job and, because I am not up to anything, nothing ever comes of it. It makes me wonder, though... In a day and age when I am not inclined to see racism toward myself but have a heightened sensitivity about racism towards blacks (and others) (indeed, even looking out for it myself), using this specific example, how often is racism getting read into a situation when a security guard is just doing his or her job irrespective of any racial, no less racist, considerations? In those cases, where is the racism coming from? When the racism is not objectively extant in the heart or mind of the security officer, it is getting subjectively infused into the situation by the black person. When this happens, it is a psychological problem, not an actual one, and, in this day and age, I think this is probably the case much more often, not than not, but than we, and especially (liberal) blacks, are inclined to think.
 
Indeed, given that it was not able to be found by multiple objective parties, from local Sanford authorities to the FBI to a jury, that Zimmerman acted out of racial animus, could it not be said that the outrage about the Zimmerman verdict is possibly a case in point of racism being read into a situation where it does not really exist?  Assuming that all of these objective parties are not idiots or themselves racists, it does not seem to be unreasonable to suggest that that could very well be the case.  
 
With that said, yes, racial discrimination needs to be discouraged (and, mind you, I know that I am setting aside the complicating factor of actions on both sides that serve to confirm racist beliefs in both directions and racial profiling particularly in one, which serves to perpetuate this psychology), but the subjective psychological dimension is much more intractable because it requires self-reflection and self-critique for it to be overcome (and, again, this is not to mention the connection between trends in behavior and racial profiling, and how that contributes to the perpetuation of this psychology). Overcoming this psychology is not a matter of changing the system, whatever that means (I think it is leftist codeword/claptrap for revolution). Indeed, any "changes" to the system will be unhealthy and overly radical if the aforementioned psychology and subjectivism persist. The inclination to see racism at every turn must be resisted. Meanwhile, the political left is invested in preventing us from doing just that.
« Last Edit: Jul 23rd, 2013, 4:46am by Stegfucius » Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #511 on: Jul 23rd, 2013, 12:15am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

An uncharacteristically brief addendum to my last post...
 
The message sent by outrage about the Zimmerman verdict to America and, more importantly, the black community (by implication of the outrage itself) is that, if racial profiling (by whites of blacks) is eliminated, then life for black males will noticeably improve. (Oh, racial profiling and the "rash" of murders of blacks by whites, of course. ) (Otherwise, why such outrage about this exceptional case?) Such a message takes the elimination of racial profiling as a starting point, a sufficient condition. This has it bass-awkwards and only serves to obfuscate the real changes that need to take place in the black community and, incidentally, that would matter-of-factly serve to decrease racial profiling. But, hey, victims = votes for democrats! Keep up the misdirection like the promotion of abortion as the solution to the breakdown of the African-American family.
« Last Edit: Jul 23rd, 2013, 5:04am by Stegfucius » Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #512 on: Jul 30th, 2013, 3:57pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Miraculous... and very courageous...
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en4LelP59mI!
 
And, if you disagree, you are a racist homophobe!
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #513 on: Aug 2nd, 2013, 9:10am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

As a nation, we have not just turned the corner on this issue.  We have gone around the bend!
 
We live in a time and place where, if 20-30 years ago you were an armed robber, felony murderer, cop killer and domestic terrorist, but radical leftist, you have a cushy position as a professor at Columbia University waiting for you upon release from prison, but, if 20-30 years ago you in a private conversation with your spouse about being held up by a black guy at gunpoint said the "N-word", you are out of a job and a social pariah.
 
On the other hand, if you are a black man and create a 20/30-year resume of divisiveness, advocating for liars and faux victims of race crimes and spewing the most vile hate-filled reverse-racist, anti-semitic shit, but, because it is in the "right" direction and fits the leftist narrative, plan to be GIVEN the bully pulpit of a prime-time TV show!
 
America is a one-way street now!  Go against it, and be prepared to be run over... on purpose!  Question is, are we too far down it?
 
Relativism looks like pluralism, but it ain't!!!  Indeed, it is quite the contrary!!!  Think it through... fast!!!
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #514 on: Aug 4th, 2013, 9:29pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Alright, I want to get, at least closer, to the core here and what the implications are...  Time for dialectic! Hence, also, the change to my western philosophy alter ego, Stegrates!
 
Here is the question I would like to pose to "all" readers (as if we have an expansive readership these days)...  Mind you, it took A LOT of time to think through a concise and appropriate formulation for this initial question!
 
Are we trying to abolish the "n-word", or are we trying to abolish all insensitive language that divides along group lines?
 
Note, the "or" there is not mutually exclusive.  That is to say that the answer can be somewhere "in between".
 
Let's stay on point!  Please, just answer the question(s) posed, moreover, like the construction of the question(s), in a thoughtful and succinct manner, and I will do my best to keep my questioning tight, relative to the responses!  Let's make this a pithy back-and-forth, and let's get somewhere...
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #515 on: Aug 10th, 2013, 6:59am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Wow, nary a chirp in reply to my prior "academic" post... So, good-bye to "Stegrates" for a bit. It is back to "StegRock"!
 
ANYway, with respect to the following,...
 
... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y70tZDW2AqY...
 
... if the roles in terms of race were reversed, despite the circumstances being exactly the same, that is, as they are being, of course, quickly determined by the authorities in this case, that is, that this was NOT race-related, can you imagine the response? First off, there would absolutely not be any quick determinations about race not being involved. That said, even if there were... Heck, I can see old DD's coming to defense,... eh-hem,... I mean,... going on offense already! ...
« Last Edit: Aug 10th, 2013, 5:51pm by Stegfucius » Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #516 on: Aug 14th, 2013, 8:34pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Conservatives DOMINATE talk radio, that is to say, specifically the medium of radio, and by way way of experiences I have had lately, including on this thread, I came to realize a small point but one that speaks volumes to the heart of why that is the case. Leftist Air America could not last a year on its own, and left-leaning NPR only survives because it is funded by government, but I digress...
 
All radio hosts have to keep an audience's attention is the content of what they are saying. There is nothing else to appeal to. No bells and whistles! Conservative talk radio offers up well-reasoned arguments and well-argued positions. Leftist liberals repeat mindless claptrap, vapid boilerplate and so-called "arguments" based on: "We think this way, and you cannot judge us," usually capped off with righteous indignation and ad hominem attacks because lefties, to their great surprise, cannot win the argument despite their wielding their "fist ball that wins it all" of RELATIVISM. Without the marches, chants, drum beats, slogans, placards, mob and such, and the cameras to catch it all, that gets boring even for leftists, no less anybody else, left-leaners included.
 
Repeating intellectually dishonest, oftentimes feeble-minded demagoguery does not work on radio. Solid reasoning and well thought-out logic and common sense DO! To wit, left-leaning radio shows, few though there are, have on like-minded guests and do interviews with those of like mind way more often than show hosts on the right. Point being, one person can only repeat such drivel so many times. On the other hand, righties largely do monologue, and, when they do have a guest on, it is not unusual that it is someone from the other side with whom they engage in argumentation.
 
Bottom line, this all could very well be taken as proof in the pudding or at least strong evidence of the right's having more intellectually honest well-reasoned positions than the left!
« Last Edit: Aug 14th, 2013, 8:47pm by Stegfucius » Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #517 on: Aug 16th, 2013, 4:02pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

DD, anyone, I would like to ask...
 
Do blacks ever see racism where it is not?
 
For that matter, do people see racism where it is not?
 
Feel free to qualify your answers...
« Last Edit: Aug 16th, 2013, 4:03pm by Stegfucius » Logged
DirkDiggler
Gridiron Great
GBRFLer
Champ - '14
*****
# 5





   
View Profile

Posts: 3117

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #518 on: Aug 16th, 2013, 9:25pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Aug 16th, 2013, 4:02pm, StegRock wrote:
DD, anyone, I would like to ask...
 
Do blacks ever see racism where it is not?
 
For that matter, do people see racism where it is not?
 
Feel free to qualify your answers...

 
 
Of course they do. Your question of a whole race is kind broad so there is always going to be someone.
 
I could flip the question and ask.....do people NOT see racism where racism exists?
 
 
Are there racists? Yes. Are there people who use racism as an excuse for anything? Yes.
 
I digress:
 
I HOPE we could agree that the truth of racism lies somewhere in the middle, you could of asked if discrimination was a problem. Many white people would of said no. The street I used to live off of in Alexandria, VA (one of the last areas to end segregation) was named after the supreme court justice who wrote the opinion of the Dred Scott decision.
 
So can we agree that what is viewed as correct today may not have been viewed correct 50 years ago. And what is correct today may not be correct in 50 years......
« Last Edit: Aug 16th, 2013, 9:35pm by DirkDiggler » Logged

"Every rule has an exception....the exception can't become the rule"
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #519 on: Aug 16th, 2013, 11:55pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Aug 16th, 2013, 9:25pm, DirkDiggler wrote:
Of course they do. Your question of a whole race is kind broad so there is always going to be someone.

 
Is your suggestion that most do not, though? I ask because that seems to be the intimation of your qualification.
 
Quote:
I could flip the question and ask.....do people NOT see racism where racism exists?

 
In fact, not necessarily. It is actually very complicated. By and large, whites, towards themselves, yes; blacks, towards themselves, no. I think whites are very much so inclined, perhaps even encouraged, to see racism against blacks EVERYWHERE and not themselves anywhere and blacks very disinclined, perhaps even discouraged, not to see racism where it is not. In fact everything relevant to race in the media these days and in this discussion suggests so.
 
Yet, your presentation is subtly tendentious. In a very subtle way, like with your aforementioned qualification in response to my question, you make your point by pointing to something (a "someone" out of a "whole race") as if it were a rarity when in fact, if it were a rarity, it would be a rarity which would be the very opposite of what the case arguably is even according to you but, MOREOVER, which would fly in the face of what the history with respect to African-Americans that your (broader) position is based upon suggests (you are all in knots here, man). In so doing, you continue to place the burden of black liberation on whites.
 
But, you seemed to think Obama's speech after the Zimmerman verdict was heroic or noble (like the rest of the liberal schmucks). So, anyway, what else could I have expected from you? What would have been really heroic is if, after he said what he said, he used it as a "teachable moment" for his community and not just for whites. He could have spoken about behavior patterns that perpetuate negative attitudes towards blacks and about seeing racism where it is not, which was the case according to virtually ALL the people, authorities, jurors, etc., who were intimately involved in the adjudication of the Zimmerman case and did not find that racism was involved. He could have actually crossed racial boundaries and said something like, given the recent history of burglaries and home invasions in that community, George Zimmerman too could have been me! How awesome would it be to have a President who identified with BOTH participants in this case? But, hey, when you can get them swooning and awarding you Nobel Peace Prizes for claptrap, why go off script? But, I DIGRESS!
 
Quote:
Are there racists? Yes. Are there people who use racism as an excuse for anything? Yes.
 
I digress:
 
I HOPE we could agree that the truth of racism lies somewhere in the middle, you could of asked if discrimination was a problem. Many white people would of said no. The street I used to live off of in Alexandria, VA (one of the last areas to end segregation) was named after the supreme court justice who wrote the opinion of the Dred Scott decision.

 
"We could agree..." The written version of uptalk.
 
"We could agree..."
 
Uhhhhh,... okay...
 
Heading for the wishy-washy middle belies the level of commitment you have for your position here and, in any case, misses the point and gets us nowhere. The question remains, what can we do to help the situation? You side with an Al Sharpton-type solution (whether you realize it or not). I side with a Bill O'Reilly-type solution. Own it! I do! Do not just head for the meaningless, off-point middle.
 
Quote:
So can we agree that what is viewed as correct today may not have been viewed correct 50 years ago. And what is correct today may not be correct in 50 years......

 
"We can agree..." I feel like I am being drug,... uh,... dragged,... uh,... drugged into an MSNBC kumbayah moment here.
 
"We can agree..."
 
... that, whether you realize it or not, you are a THOROUGHGOING relativist!
 
That last sentence, especially, is proof in the pudding!
 
So, slavery was "right" 200 years ago?
 


« Last Edit: Aug 17th, 2013, 4:01am by Stegfucius » Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18970

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #520 on: Aug 17th, 2013, 4:22am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

You want to educate yourselves, folks, and not be a low-information, illogical opiner... Then, do yourselves this favor... Watch CNN and, moreover, MSNBC as much as you can, and then try to watch today's, Friday, August 16th's "Hannity" on Fox News. It will probably rerun a few times over the weekend, or maybe you can find it on-line. Mind you, Hannity is not my favorite by a long shot (he is partisan through and through), but on this show he had on Mark Levin. They discussed Levin's latest book, The Liberty Amendments, in a townhall-type format. I find it hard to believe that "reason-able" people will not find themselves nodding their heads in agreement with quite a few points. But, setting that aside, one cannot help but see the obvious difference in the level of discourse between this and ANYTHING on MSNBC. The difference is seriously like that between doctoral coursework and middle school. Stop getting your opinions on Fox News from left-leaners or outright leftists! Find out for yourself, and in the process find out where you really stand!
 
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson
« Last Edit: Aug 17th, 2013, 4:34am by Stegfucius » Logged
DirkDiggler
Gridiron Great
GBRFLer
Champ - '14
*****
# 5





   
View Profile

Posts: 3117

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #521 on: Aug 17th, 2013, 11:12am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I am not sure I can have this discussion with you. It is like arguing with my wife. I make a statement and you take it to the extreme.  
 
I think the biggest irony of your argument in my opinion is that you are so anti-CNN and MSNBC , however, you are spewing the rhetoric of there is only a right or wrong answer in which the right leaning media (either left or right) seems to be touting and you are giving the thinking the actions of words of the few are the words and actions of the majority.  
 
 If there was not 24 hour news coverage and 15 news channels, this issue probably would not even be discussed. They get ratings by spouting off BS....even calling them 'news' channels is a joke. It seems you want me to say MSNBC is full of shit. And I can not argue that point. But Fox is also full of shit. They are not reporting news, they are offering opinions.  
 
When it comes to racism, how can it not be relative? How can it not be a persons perspective?  
 
You make broad statements about an entire race not recognizing discrimination. How the fuck can you say that? Because the media is covering 10 people protesting? Because they give the opinion of a few loud people. Those that shout the loudest are not usually a representation of THE people (hell, see what the tea-party has done to the republican party?) Are the 10 loud people a 'on the whole' opinion? The media was waiting for riots after the verdict. Did not happen. Protests were minor- but the media made it seem it was everywhere. (which it was not!) The media is looking for a story. To emphasize my point about your touting the media, at one point you wrote a post on why right wing radio is dominating on the air and thus must superior.
 
Anyway, There are whites who are really friggin scary in their opinions. You could cover some white supremecy meeting and get the same generalizations. If the media were to cover those, people would draw conclusions that whites hate everyone.
 
Finally, my point of what is 'right' to opinion is relative to time. 200 years ago, was slavery right? No. Was it accepted and viewed by the majority as being wrong, not really. It was accepted. Women did not get the right to vote until 100 years ago. Blacks were oppressed as little as 50 years ago. The LGBT community are just starting to get equal rights. 20 years ago, polls show LGBT community should not have 'rights'. Now, that is reversed. Clearly it is relative in time as to OPINION. What is right and wrong did not change, but OPINION has.  
 
Finally, it seems you do not think racism (or discrimination) exists or people do not act on their biases . Fact is, statistics and many case studies prove it exists. Also, you make broad sweeping statements that I just do not think are accurate or representing of the vast majority.
 
 The media is fucked up on both sides and is just looking for a story. Everything is relative to the individual (whether right or wrong). A few people do not represent the majority even though they are the loudest. And everything is relative.  
« Last Edit: Aug 17th, 2013, 3:01pm by DirkDiggler » Logged

"Every rule has an exception....the exception can't become the rule"
Travistotle
GM
GBRFLer
Champ - '06
*****
# 414



Semper Philosophans

   
View Profile

Posts: 487

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #522 on: Aug 17th, 2013, 4:35pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Aug 17th, 2013, 11:12am, DirkDiggler wrote:
Finally, my point of what is 'right' to opinion is relative to time. 200 years ago, was slavery right? No. Was it accepted and viewed by the majority as being wrong, not really. It was accepted. Women did not get the right to vote until 100 years ago. Blacks were oppressed as little as 50 years ago. The LGBT community are just starting to get equal rights. 20 years ago, polls show LGBT community should not have 'rights'. Now, that is reversed. Clearly it is relative in time as to OPINION. What is right and wrong did not change, but OPINION has.  

 
Here's the more important question: how do we know that the common opinion 50, 100, 500 years ago about these matters was in fact wrong? I get the impression that you're drawing an analogy among slavery, women's suffrage, and gay rights, viz., that the nearly universal position 50, 100, 500 years ago on these 3 issues was wrong and now we have finally got it right. On what basis do you think that our ancestors were wrong on these issues and we, finally, got it right?  I'm not denying that we finally have it right, nor am I affirming it (in point of fact, I think the analogy is wrongheaded); I'm just trying to determine the basis for the position.
 
In some sense, this is a digression from the main point under discussion, but I think it will turn out that answering my question here will go a long way to shed clarity on the entire disagreement.
« Last Edit: Aug 17th, 2013, 4:40pm by Travistotle » Logged
DirkDiggler
Gridiron Great
GBRFLer
Champ - '14
*****
# 5





   
View Profile

Posts: 3117

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #523 on: Aug 17th, 2013, 5:04pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Aug 17th, 2013, 4:35pm, Travistotle wrote:

 
Here's the more important question: how do we know that the common opinion 50, 100, 500 years ago about these matters was in fact wrong? I get the impression that you're drawing an analogy among slavery, women's suffrage, and gay rights, viz., that the nearly universal position 50, 100, 500 years ago on these 3 issues was wrong and now we have finally got it right. On what basis do you think that our ancestors were wrong on these issues and we, finally, got it right? I'm not denying that we finally have it right, nor am I affirming it (in point of fact, I think the analogy is wrongheaded); I'm just trying to determine the basis for the position.
 
In some sense, this is a digression from the main point under discussion, but I think it will turn out that answering my question here will go a long way to shed clarity on the entire disagreement.

 
Were our ancestors correct? Do we not think our society is moving in the correct direction? Biases (often the basis for racism/prejudices) continue to evolve. It just takes some people longer than others. To say that we have solved the racism/prejudices issue is a bunch of crock. Is it better? Absolutely! Does it still exist? Absolutely.  
 
 
What I am trying to say - is that it is all relative. I am not saying we have it right or wrong today either. (we are clearly moving in the right direction in my opinion). However, it is a point that what we are dealing with is all a point in time. What someone viewed 20 years ago in regards to racism is different than today and will be different in 20 years from now.  
 
I just do not think it is correct to make sweeping statements about how an entire demographic feels by using the exception, or literally minority of a minority.
 
 
 
« Last Edit: Aug 17th, 2013, 5:06pm by DirkDiggler » Logged

"Every rule has an exception....the exception can't become the rule"
Travistotle
GM
GBRFLer
Champ - '06
*****
# 414



Semper Philosophans

   
View Profile

Posts: 487

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #524 on: Aug 17th, 2013, 6:17pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Aug 17th, 2013, 5:04pm, DirkDiggler wrote:

Were our ancestors correct? Do we not think our society is moving in the correct direction? Biases (often the basis for racism/prejudices) continue to evolve. It just takes some people longer than others. To say that we have solved the racism/prejudices issue is a bunch of crock. Is it better? Absolutely! Does it still exist? Absolutely.  
 
What I am trying to say - is that it is all relative. I am not saying we have it right or wrong today either. (we are clearly moving in the right direction in my opinion). However, it is a point that what we are dealing with is all a point in time. What someone viewed 20 years ago in regards to racism is different than today and will be different in 20 years from now.  
 
I just do not think it is correct to make sweeping statements about how an entire demographic feels by using the exception, or literally minority of a minority.

 
I guess I'll re-phrase my question: are we right to move in the direction we're moving as a society, in these 3 areas you listed (and I re-iterated)? I'm not asking if things are better now than they used to be, nor how far we've addressed racism, etc. I'm asking whether what we are trying to do is right, whether our goals/views on these 3 issues in question are correct, and, if they are, what is the argument for that.
« Last Edit: Aug 17th, 2013, 6:17pm by Travistotle » Logged
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 22 23  24 Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

No topic|Next topic

Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.1!
YaBB 2000-2002,
Xnull. All Rights Reserved.

Most smilies provided by "MySmilies.com", "Jason's Smiley Collection" or "Clicksmilies.com".
"the Gridiron" Copyright 2002-2016 - Product of FantasyFootballer.com. All rights reserved.