wot

Recent Comments
Says a lot about a person when they try to use liberal (or other or different from themselves) as a pejorative. You aren't credible either. But they NYT, while far from perfect, is a generally credible source of news. I get that you aren't an expert (which is why your opinion on the matter isn't important) but do you really not get the difference between bias and credibility? Or that opinions, when presented as such, aren't news, even if they are issued by a news source?
Cool, another person who just walks in making assumptions because they think they know everything. SAD! Like we needed another of those guys here. Not that I owe anyone an explanation (especially not someone who tends to give up when they run out of stuff to say when they're trying to argue), or that it matters in the slightest, but sometimes - oh, idk - a website that requires login for comments won't let an existing user log in, so they create a new account in order to comment, and when their browser saves both and both are working, they sometimes use the two interchangeably. Says a lot about a person when they care more about who is presenting an argument than what the argument is.
Well, I heard it from 2 unqualified randos on the internet, guess it must be true. /s Again, no news source is perfect, but NYT is one of the more credible sources out there, even if it doesn't always agree with your bias.
My points, again, for those who can't read: 1) It is funny to see a Mizzou fan say they were bad 2) It is funny to see someone claim Mizzou v UGA in 2018 was so close that an "average" defense would have won mizzou the game. Can't you just admit when you're wrong?
Lol, who in the world doesn't agree with everyone else that the NYT is about as credible as it gets in print media? I'm guessing absolute perfection is the standard, but only for anything you don't like/agree with?
Lol UGA better win every game if they want a chance at the playoff - GT & UF are represented on the committee.
Eventually NFL teams will realize that overpaying for a decent-but-not-great QB makes little sense, right? When was the last time a QB not on their rookie contract and not named Brady or Manning won the Super Bowl? If you don't have a sure-fire hall of fame QB, don't pay him like one.
Lol, just give the crazies a little bit more time
You brought up my point about taxes. Stop complaining about me addressing a point you brought up. You still haven't explained why you have a right to tell Nike what to do, but I've given up hope of receiving even an attempt at a discussion, much less a reasonable one.
Well my 'nonsense' would still be less of a waste of time than your juvenile ad hominems. You have in no way rebuffed my point nor have you adequately defended your own. I think that we shouldn't get to force companies to make and sell products they don't want to; you disagree, and think you should get to tell Nike what to do. Pretty sure you're talking about the wrong article, but I'm not surprised; denial and abandoning consistent reason often lead to confusion.
Um, taxes have existed for much longer than that. Which is part of my point and wasn't supposed to be new ground (despite some people struggling with it).
When you can't argue my ideas, you try to attack me. Classic. And then following that up with an ironic comment about credibility...you've outdone yourself, congrats.
Likewise Kap is known for the message conveyed by kneeling during the national anthem, not socks he wore once. There are times where the messenger and message become so intertwined that they are essentially inseparable (societally; I still maintain we can and should seek to do so individually), but you seem to think that this has happened with hitler & highways, Kap & socks when the reality is closer to this occurring with hitler & hate, Kap & protesting racial inequality, specifically in policing. Btw, presence/absence of nuance is a horrible criteria for accepting/rejecting arguments. There are good and bad ones both with and without it.
It's pretty clear that 'my' logic is to evaluate the message and messenger independently. So if you think that means you should support hitler, then you either disagree with my logic or you support his ideas. Honestly, both of those scare me; if that's you, seek help. BTW, no one says "highway system" when you ask what hitler's message was.
Pointing out that racially unequal adverse police encounters are widespread does not dehumanize police. The system and the individuals are not mutually exclusive, but they are not synonymous either. If more cops are assigned to a location and encouraged to police more heavily and aggressively because of orders from superiors who are beholden to politicians who are elected by people, pointing out flaws in the system is not calling the beat cop subhuman. I don't know why you're construing his socks as part of his message (that was a bad, dumb thing, but clearly part of the messenger not the message).
@LSU - I want US to tell people what they do with some of their stuff (taxes) because that's the only way we've figured out to survive as society. You're the one who wants to tell others (Nike) what to do with their stuff. Should we laugh or sob?
Except they didn't put it on the market. And even if they did, they can take it off the market because it's theirs, not yours. Missed the mark on calling me a liberal, but since you think we all own everyone else's stuff, maybe you're projecting?
Nike decided, not him. Why do you think you have a right to tell them what to do with their stuff?
Not even close, unless you think you should get to force companies to make and sell you whatever you want. It was their material, labor, cost, etc. and their product. Their decision. If you want to be able to tell them what to make and what to do with it, own the socialist label.
How can you expect him to talk to every veteran? What about the dead? Even if he did, they don't all agree. Just because he didn't talk to you doesn't make him wrong or you right. Not sure where old flags belong anywhere outside of museums...what's the point?
Not sure what the first paragraph is trying to say, but it's a problem that is more widespread than just a few individuals/instances. No clue what the second paragraph is trying to say, though it seems like it abandons logic to falsely imply I support Hitler? The message can definitely be critiqued independently, but that isn't what you're doing when you complain about Kapernick, who is the messenger.
That isn't a gift/donation; it's what they owe and are obliged to pay.
I can't talk with someone who won't read what I wrote, not what they want to see.
Swift's numbers aren't too flashy, but some of that film is nasty. I doubt he really factored into this calculation, but he's good enough to be mentioned.
I'm not picky about the penalty as long as it's reasonable. Problem is, we either won't get the change or it'll be unreasonable.
I agree that it sucks to have everyone down on your team, but I think it works to your advantage this year. The team has some questions and a very unforgiving schedule. If the narrative is about which of Bama, UGA, and Clemson they'll beat, then the bar of expectations is extremely high, and they'll likely disappoint 2 years in a row. But if the narrative is about a tough schedule/do they make it to 6-7 wins, then a bowl game, much less 8-9 wins becomes an incredible season and there's less pressure. It's no fun during the offseason, but the latter approach pays off in the fall.
@UGARMYRet - He specifically changed his protest out of respect for military members after consulting with some of them. Besides, one of the many rights that so many have fought and died for is his right to say things we don't agree with. There are also plenty of military people who fought and died for a country and people who oppressed them, and many military members fought/died for the ideals of the country. So I'd argue that we do owe them respect, but that working towards ending oppression would be far more respectful than standing for the anthem (though that'd be nice too). I get that it's personal for a lot of people, but so is the oppression that people have dealt with and still deal with. As long as people aren't interested in what others are saying and feeling, people will remain offended, bitter, and divided.
I'm not going to defend dehumanizing people, but that pretty clearly isn't what his campaign is about. If you need a perfect messenger, you'll never get any messages. If you accept messages from other imperfect messengers but not him, you're probably being inconsistent/hypocritical at best. I agree that alienating some people is inevitable, but I think it is less a logical necessity than a reality of flawed human nature.