the checklist as a picture perfect spokesperson. CK doesn't have to be well versed across every civil rights matter, especially when I'd wager most younger folks don't know the full scale of Castro's atrocities. It does not mean the issue he's trying to bring attention to isn't still there.
Dunedin clearly isn't racist. But both parties use a term they like in order to refuse to acknowledge any point the other may make. It's a great way of avoiding an actual discussion.
Kaepernick is very stupid IMO - doesn't mean he doesn't have some shred of a point.
we don't dismiss their cause because they are stupid; that would be the ad-hominem fallacy. But they are still stupid.
That's a very fair take. The way I look at it is this: Would you rather go after one person (in this case CK), or address a broader issue that's going on in our backyard? Seems to me, people would rather focus on CK, and to me, that highlights something backwards in what we place value in.
as I've said before, the fact that Kaep is black makes it too easy for blowhards to voice their opinions about him. If Kaep or another person doing it was white...there'd be no issue. Literally no issue at all. I don't think anyone would dispute that.
as I've said before, the fact that Kaep is black makes it too easy for blowhards to voice their opinions about him. If Kaep or another person doing it was white...there'd be no issue. Literally no issue at all. I don't think anyone would dispute that.
If CK didn't wear pig socks or a Castro shirt, the blowhards wouldn't have anything to criticize him for.
is that CK spent time with kids, teaching them how to properly interact with police, better understand the letter of the law, take pride in their heritage, and people freak out that he's running a black panther camp, as if he's militarizing them.
as I've said before, the fact that Kaep is black makes it too easy for blowhards to voice their opinions about him. If Kaep or another person doing it was white...there'd be no issue. Literally no issue at all. I don't think anyone would dispute that.
If CK didn't wear pig socks or a Castro shirt, the blowhards wouldn't have anything to criticize him for.
Completely disagree. He was getting flack before the shirt and socks.
RE: RE: stupid people can be right about many things
we don't dismiss their cause because they are stupid; that would be the ad-hominem fallacy. But they are still stupid.
That's a very fair take. The way I look at it is this: Would you rather go after one person (in this case CK), or address a broader issue that's going on in our backyard? Seems to me, people would rather focus on CK, and to me, that highlights something backwards in what we place value in.
Personally, I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause. If you were a religious Christian, would you want your dumb uncle championing the cause of Christ in facebook rants? If you were gay, would you want to point to the most adolescent in-your-face exhibitions of gay pride to say "yep, that's what we're all about."
And when he expresses his cause as platitudes, then it's hard to know what to latch on to. The "pigs" socks really ruined his chance of being a person to thoughtfully help this dialogue, IMHO.
So, I think that trying to not be reactive, one can say he's basically a brat, and then say "could someone who agrees with his cause when actually spelled out coherently make a case, and let's talk."
It's like dumb bands like "Rage against the Machine." Are we going to learn from them about the evils of capitalism beyond T-shirts and platitudes? No. But if someone more thoughtful speaks up, let's chat.
as I've said before, the fact that Kaep is black makes it too easy for blowhards to voice their opinions about him. If Kaep or another person doing it was white...there'd be no issue. Literally no issue at all. I don't think anyone would dispute that.
If CK didn't wear pig socks or a Castro shirt, the blowhards wouldn't have anything to criticize him for.
If you think CK wearing pig socks is some inhumane act, fine. But where are the blowhards when the cops do something worse? They are nowhere. They only criticize people of color when they do something they feel is wrong because it's entirely too convenient for their narrative. Talking about the awful cops in this country just isn't good press for them apparently.
is that CK spent time with kids, teaching them how to properly interact with police, better understand the letter of the law, take pride in their heritage, and people freak out that he's running a black panther camp, as if he's militarizing them.
And why do you think this is? I think we all know, but some people just don't want to say it.
calling people racist or saying they have racist views. The same people who always talk about being "politically correct" are the same one who dance around the subject. The world would be much better off if people would just admit it.
as I've said before, the fact that Kaep is black makes it too easy for blowhards to voice their opinions about him. If Kaep or another person doing it was white...there'd be no issue. Literally no issue at all. I don't think anyone would dispute that.
If CK didn't wear pig socks or a Castro shirt, the blowhards wouldn't have anything to criticize him for.
If you think CK wearing pig socks is some inhumane act, fine. But where are the blowhards when the cops do something worse? They are nowhere. They only criticize people of color when they do something they feel is wrong because it's entirely too convenient for their narrative. Talking about the awful cops in this country just isn't good press for them apparently.
Focusing on the 'blowhards' (likely a small, loud minority) is no different than focusing on pig socks. Instead of furthering his point, you're just attacking other individuals and giving them more cause to get enraged.
You'd be far better off ignoring the 'blowhards' and trying to stay on message.
I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause either, I kind of look at it as haggling over what type of spokesperson is necessary to bring attention to an issue. Not everyone is a Lebron James level almost perfect spokesperson, with the best PR people money can buy. CK rolled the dice, and if I were in his shoes, I'd think that the kneeling could jeopardize chance at any further employment in the NFL. He took a stand/knee, brought attention to an issue.
calling people racist or saying they have racist views. The same people who always talk about being "politically correct" are the same one who dance around the subject. The world would be much better off if people would just admit it.
The world would be better off if people actually listened to those who have opposing views and tried to understand where they are coming from. Then they might actually be able to address the differences and eventually resolve the underlying issues. Instead they just shout louder and claim anyone that disagrees is racist, sexist, anti-christian, whatever -ist you want to include.
I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause either, I kind of look at it as haggling over what type of spokesperson is necessary to bring attention to an issue. Not everyone is a Lebron James level almost perfect spokesperson, with the best PR people money can buy. CK rolled the dice, and if I were in his shoes, I'd think that the kneeling could jeopardize chance at any further employment in the NFL. He took a stand/knee, brought attention to an issue.
Compared to his play on the field, his kneeling is a minor footnote towards his chances of future employment in the NFL...
I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause either, I kind of look at it as haggling over what type of spokesperson is necessary to bring attention to an issue. Not everyone is a Lebron James level almost perfect spokesperson, with the best PR people money can buy. CK rolled the dice, and if I were in his shoes, I'd think that the kneeling could jeopardize chance at any further employment in the NFL. He took a stand/knee, brought attention to an issue.
That's fair, David. I have to get back work; good chatting with you, and keep your pants on.
RE: RE: RE: stupid people can be right about many things
we don't dismiss their cause because they are stupid; that would be the ad-hominem fallacy. But they are still stupid.
That's a very fair take. The way I look at it is this: Would you rather go after one person (in this case CK), or address a broader issue that's going on in our backyard? Seems to me, people would rather focus on CK, and to me, that highlights something backwards in what we place value in.
Personally, I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause. If you were a religious Christian, would you want your dumb uncle championing the cause of Christ in facebook rants? If you were gay, would you want to point to the most adolescent in-your-face exhibitions of gay pride to say "yep, that's what we're all about."
And when he expresses his cause as platitudes, then it's hard to know what to latch on to. The "pigs" socks really ruined his chance of being a person to thoughtfully help this dialogue, IMHO.
So, I think that trying to not be reactive, one can say he's basically a brat, and then say "could someone who agrees with his cause when actually spelled out coherently make a case, and let's talk."
It's like dumb bands like "Rage against the Machine." Are we going to learn from them about the evils of capitalism beyond T-shirts and platitudes? No. But if someone more thoughtful speaks up, let's chat.
Just some musings.
Hey! What's with the dig on RATM? Even though it's a joke that they are allegedly anti capitalist while being signed to a major label, lol.
And yeah, cmon, Dunedin isn't racist, even if you don't agree with him. Calling everyone a racist when they aren't just cheapens the word and takes away what it means. There are a number of other posters on here to whom that label more appropriately applies to. Dunedin definitely isn't one of them, even if I don't agree with everything he says.
RE: RE: Good post Moon, I generally agree with you
I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause either, I kind of look at it as haggling over what type of spokesperson is necessary to bring attention to an issue. Not everyone is a Lebron James level almost perfect spokesperson, with the best PR people money can buy. CK rolled the dice, and if I were in his shoes, I'd think that the kneeling could jeopardize chance at any further employment in the NFL. He took a stand/knee, brought attention to an issue.
Compared to his play on the field, his kneeling is a minor footnote towards his chances of future employment in the NFL...
:=)
Touche! :-)
RE: RE: Good post Moon, I generally agree with you
I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause either, I kind of look at it as haggling over what type of spokesperson is necessary to bring attention to an issue. Not everyone is a Lebron James level almost perfect spokesperson, with the best PR people money can buy. CK rolled the dice, and if I were in his shoes, I'd think that the kneeling could jeopardize chance at any further employment in the NFL. He took a stand/knee, brought attention to an issue.
That's fair, David. I have to get back work; good chatting with you, and keep your pants on.
Nice chatting with you as well. I'll try my best to keep my drawers on, not making any promises!
While thoroughly bored with Kaep drama by this point
(formerly somewhat sympathetic, he lost me with Castro), I have to chime in to defend Rage Against the Machine.
Regardless of Morello's outspokenness (he also chimed in about Fidel) and perceived hypocrisy of fulminating against Capitalism while concurrently profiting from it, his band rocks so ridiculously fucking hard that he could be screaming about basically anything and I'd still be dialed in.
Their debut self-titled release in '92 is straight up one of the best albums of all time. Any genre.
--
Now back to your regularly scheduled Kaepernick discussion.
think it's important to note era. Absolutely no disrespect to the legend of Ali but I don't think he (or anyone else for that matter) from eras pre social media/24 hour news would be looked at as highly as they were during their time. I'm not some Ali expert but I've read some "not so great" things about him to the point I think his "approval rating" would be lower than it is given his era... I also think it's part of the reason Lebron is heavily shit on. Lebron is seemingly a pretty awesome person (stupid "The Decision" crap aside).
think it's important to note era. Absolutely no disrespect to the legend of Ali but I don't think he (or anyone else for that matter) from eras pre social media/24 hour news would be looked at as highly as they were during their time. I'm not some Ali expert but I've read some "not so great" things about him to the point I think his "approval rating" would be lower than it is given his era... I also think it's part of the reason Lebron is heavily shit on. Lebron is seemingly a pretty awesome person (stupid "The Decision" crap aside).
Revisionists like to pretend that Ali wasn't hated by many. A lot of the admirers would probably despise Ali today too IMO.
is something sort of nice about not having every last person picked apart. Wall to wall coverage exposing MLK Jr of cheating on his wife might have made some think lesser of him. Ask people what they don't like about Lebron and it's generally vague or silly. Humans are flawed.
as a "basketball villain" (duly facilitated by himself with the absurd transition to Miami) and as a person. He is plainly a pretty caring guy and as far as social commentary, the anti-Jordan. I suspect he really values being homies with the Prez which has no doubt in part engendered his activism (or w/e you wanna call it).
On the court: it's remarkable how rapidly he has transitioned back into the good guy (with a key assist from KD). It's rather obvious that he did not enjoy being the villain, esp in the eyes of his fellow Ohioans. I strongly disliked him as a Heat (something I don't see as irrational), but after witnessing the positively epic comeback the Cavs pulled off, led by him, I can't help but respect the hell out of him. This deserves to go down as a top 5 finals moment of all time, and we'll be seeing it when we're old, grey, and impotent.
--
Your point about eras is salient. You can apply it in many areas...Presidents for instance. FDR's infirmed appearance in another era? GW's temper? JFK's insatiable erection? etc.
Your point about eras is salient. You can apply it in many areas...Presidents for instance. FDR's infirmed appearance in another era? GW's temper? JFK's insatiable erection? etc.
Kaepernick is very stupid IMO - doesn't mean he doesn't have some shred of a point.
It's not a cheap accusation. Calling a spade a spade is how I'd see it.
That's a very fair take. The way I look at it is this: Would you rather go after one person (in this case CK), or address a broader issue that's going on in our backyard? Seems to me, people would rather focus on CK, and to me, that highlights something backwards in what we place value in.
If CK didn't wear pig socks or a Castro shirt, the blowhards wouldn't have anything to criticize him for.
Quote:
as I've said before, the fact that Kaep is black makes it too easy for blowhards to voice their opinions about him. If Kaep or another person doing it was white...there'd be no issue. Literally no issue at all. I don't think anyone would dispute that.
If CK didn't wear pig socks or a Castro shirt, the blowhards wouldn't have anything to criticize him for.
Completely disagree. He was getting flack before the shirt and socks.
Quote:
we don't dismiss their cause because they are stupid; that would be the ad-hominem fallacy. But they are still stupid.
That's a very fair take. The way I look at it is this: Would you rather go after one person (in this case CK), or address a broader issue that's going on in our backyard? Seems to me, people would rather focus on CK, and to me, that highlights something backwards in what we place value in.
Personally, I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause. If you were a religious Christian, would you want your dumb uncle championing the cause of Christ in facebook rants? If you were gay, would you want to point to the most adolescent in-your-face exhibitions of gay pride to say "yep, that's what we're all about."
And when he expresses his cause as platitudes, then it's hard to know what to latch on to. The "pigs" socks really ruined his chance of being a person to thoughtfully help this dialogue, IMHO.
So, I think that trying to not be reactive, one can say he's basically a brat, and then say "could someone who agrees with his cause when actually spelled out coherently make a case, and let's talk."
It's like dumb bands like "Rage against the Machine." Are we going to learn from them about the evils of capitalism beyond T-shirts and platitudes? No. But if someone more thoughtful speaks up, let's chat.
Just some musings.
Quote:
as I've said before, the fact that Kaep is black makes it too easy for blowhards to voice their opinions about him. If Kaep or another person doing it was white...there'd be no issue. Literally no issue at all. I don't think anyone would dispute that.
If CK didn't wear pig socks or a Castro shirt, the blowhards wouldn't have anything to criticize him for.
If you think CK wearing pig socks is some inhumane act, fine. But where are the blowhards when the cops do something worse? They are nowhere. They only criticize people of color when they do something they feel is wrong because it's entirely too convenient for their narrative. Talking about the awful cops in this country just isn't good press for them apparently.
And why do you think this is? I think we all know, but some people just don't want to say it.
Quote:
In comment 13241472 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
as I've said before, the fact that Kaep is black makes it too easy for blowhards to voice their opinions about him. If Kaep or another person doing it was white...there'd be no issue. Literally no issue at all. I don't think anyone would dispute that.
If CK didn't wear pig socks or a Castro shirt, the blowhards wouldn't have anything to criticize him for.
If you think CK wearing pig socks is some inhumane act, fine. But where are the blowhards when the cops do something worse? They are nowhere. They only criticize people of color when they do something they feel is wrong because it's entirely too convenient for their narrative. Talking about the awful cops in this country just isn't good press for them apparently.
Focusing on the 'blowhards' (likely a small, loud minority) is no different than focusing on pig socks. Instead of furthering his point, you're just attacking other individuals and giving them more cause to get enraged.
You'd be far better off ignoring the 'blowhards' and trying to stay on message.
The world would be better off if people actually listened to those who have opposing views and tried to understand where they are coming from. Then they might actually be able to address the differences and eventually resolve the underlying issues. Instead they just shout louder and claim anyone that disagrees is racist, sexist, anti-christian, whatever -ist you want to include.
The list of logical fallacies that he is employed in order to justify an insult is long and distinguished.
Compared to his play on the field, his kneeling is a minor footnote towards his chances of future employment in the NFL...
:=)
That's fair, David. I have to get back work; good chatting with you, and keep your pants on.
Quote:
In comment 13241460 Moondawg said:
Quote:
we don't dismiss their cause because they are stupid; that would be the ad-hominem fallacy. But they are still stupid.
That's a very fair take. The way I look at it is this: Would you rather go after one person (in this case CK), or address a broader issue that's going on in our backyard? Seems to me, people would rather focus on CK, and to me, that highlights something backwards in what we place value in.
Personally, I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause. If you were a religious Christian, would you want your dumb uncle championing the cause of Christ in facebook rants? If you were gay, would you want to point to the most adolescent in-your-face exhibitions of gay pride to say "yep, that's what we're all about."
And when he expresses his cause as platitudes, then it's hard to know what to latch on to. The "pigs" socks really ruined his chance of being a person to thoughtfully help this dialogue, IMHO.
So, I think that trying to not be reactive, one can say he's basically a brat, and then say "could someone who agrees with his cause when actually spelled out coherently make a case, and let's talk."
It's like dumb bands like "Rage against the Machine." Are we going to learn from them about the evils of capitalism beyond T-shirts and platitudes? No. But if someone more thoughtful speaks up, let's chat.
Just some musings.
And yeah, cmon, Dunedin isn't racist, even if you don't agree with him. Calling everyone a racist when they aren't just cheapens the word and takes away what it means. There are a number of other posters on here to whom that label more appropriately applies to. Dunedin definitely isn't one of them, even if I don't agree with everything he says.
Quote:
I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause either, I kind of look at it as haggling over what type of spokesperson is necessary to bring attention to an issue. Not everyone is a Lebron James level almost perfect spokesperson, with the best PR people money can buy. CK rolled the dice, and if I were in his shoes, I'd think that the kneeling could jeopardize chance at any further employment in the NFL. He took a stand/knee, brought attention to an issue.
Compared to his play on the field, his kneeling is a minor footnote towards his chances of future employment in the NFL...
:=)
Touche! :-)
Quote:
I wouldn't want an idiot championing my cause either, I kind of look at it as haggling over what type of spokesperson is necessary to bring attention to an issue. Not everyone is a Lebron James level almost perfect spokesperson, with the best PR people money can buy. CK rolled the dice, and if I were in his shoes, I'd think that the kneeling could jeopardize chance at any further employment in the NFL. He took a stand/knee, brought attention to an issue.
That's fair, David. I have to get back work; good chatting with you, and keep your pants on.
Nice chatting with you as well. I'll try my best to keep my drawers on, not making any promises!
Regardless of Morello's outspokenness (he also chimed in about Fidel) and perceived hypocrisy of fulminating against Capitalism while concurrently profiting from it, his band rocks so ridiculously fucking hard that he could be screaming about basically anything and I'd still be dialed in.
Their debut self-titled release in '92 is straight up one of the best albums of all time. Any genre.
--
Now back to your regularly scheduled Kaepernick discussion.
Ryanmkeane, if you're just calling it as you see it, then you should get your eyes checked. Even your hindsight sucks.
Revisionists like to pretend that Ali wasn't hated by many. A lot of the admirers would probably despise Ali today too IMO.
Hope that helps
Link - ( New Window )
On the court: it's remarkable how rapidly he has transitioned back into the good guy (with a key assist from KD). It's rather obvious that he did not enjoy being the villain, esp in the eyes of his fellow Ohioans. I strongly disliked him as a Heat (something I don't see as irrational), but after witnessing the positively epic comeback the Cavs pulled off, led by him, I can't help but respect the hell out of him. This deserves to go down as a top 5 finals moment of all time, and we'll be seeing it when we're old, grey, and impotent.
--
Your point about eras is salient. You can apply it in many areas...Presidents for instance. FDR's infirmed appearance in another era? GW's temper? JFK's insatiable erection? etc.
Your point about eras is salient. You can apply it in many areas...Presidents for instance. FDR's infirmed appearance in another era? GW's temper? JFK's insatiable erection? etc.
Taft's chocoholism