GregPersons
-
Posts
982 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by GregPersons
-
-
3 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:
Peterman loves Jesus. That’s what matters.
He definitely let Jesus take the wheel on all of his passes. I'm not sure he made a single attempt with his eyes open.
Just now, LabattBlue said:He jerked scouts around last year by moving his “workout” to another site cross town. Any bridges he hadn’t burned before that, were pretty much blown up.
Nah dude you gotta look into that story again, it was the other way around on who was doing the jerking.
-
I still can't get over Nate Peterman's career and Colin Kaepernick's, just looking at those two careers in juxtaposition is...
20 years from now, somebody is going to write a book about Black Lives Matter and the Civil Rights riots of the 2010-20s, and use them as a case study for like... everything. Their careers need to be looked at by the Supreme Court or something. I'm just saying. There's a lot of material there in looking at how the NFL treated these two players over the same amount of time.
There's at LEAST a 30 for 30 there.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:
The leagues apologizes are frankly a day late and a dollar short as it were. The owners ganged up on him ended his career, and kicked him while he was down. It was an act of blatant racism.
If he plays again of his and some teams choice it will be bitter sweet at best, joining the league office may be more likely than playing, I certainly don’t know what he wants as a human being. I think he likely has mixed feelings about a return.
The NFL botched this not only morally, but as a business.
They proved they couldn't predict a rainstorm in a hurricane. They could have EASILY had the nuts to just get behind Kaep to begin with, do a BLM month like with cancer and all the other causes, and just have a little backbone in standing up to the loud racists, including Trump.
Did the NFL think the issue would go away? Did the NFL think their blacklisting Kaep and turning him into a martyr was going to make him less influential?
You know what I mean? Like even separate from the fact that, on a human being level, the NFL behaved monstrously.... just in terms of having confidence in their ability to predict the future or read the market, this was a MASSIVE failure.
Kaep would be well within his right to tell them to go screw. But I just don't think that's his character.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, RealKayAdams said:
<< TLDR Summary: please reconsider the “defund the police” slogan. >>
Good post, Mr. Persons.
Correct, language is constantly evolving. I’m sure Noam Chomsky and Richard Dawkins were smiling as they read your post. Unfortunately, the evolution of language is also a major contributor to miscommunication between people of different classes, generations, races, geographical regions, and even political affiliations…as we’re now seeing in real time.
Today I won’t push back on the merit of “defunding” the police, to use your intended meaning of the word. We agree on many of the institutional changes that need to happen within American police forces, though I’m not convinced that your process of getting there is the best one. Maybe I will soon? The argument that this drastic method is necessary to break those irrationally intransigent police unions is a compelling one, but I need to learn more. Any specific articles you recommend I read? Should I finally finish watching The Wire series?!
What I want to discuss is the merit of the marketing strategy behind the slogan, “defund the police.” Defunding only references the first of many steps that likely need to be taken. It’s a severe use of the word which has definitely captured national attention and sparked discussion, but I’m concerned about the transition from the bull-in-the-china-shop attention-capturing phase to the persuasion phase. Right now the polling numbers show roughly two-thirds of Americans do not agree in any way with the “defund the police” movement. BLM is a bottom-up grassroots organization that can’t so easily control the messaging like a top-down organization can. We may be passing a point in time where the BLM movement is losing much of its power leverage, in much the same way that additional quarantine enforcements are no longer on the political table following the public Floyd protests and the upcoming Trump rallies. Anyone with a TV or internet connection by now should be aware of the police brutality crisis toward blacks. Those who are unsure, indifferent, or outright hostile to the solution-seeking stages are probably pulling further away as each day passes with more news of protests and outbreaks of riots but inadequate discussion of solutions. This country has had plenty of race protests and riots by now. How much positive change has actually resulted from each of them? Take the infamous LA Police Department, for example: 1943 Zoot Suit riots to 1965 Watts riots to 1992 Rodney King riots to where they still are today. Why did nothing fundamentally change?
I’d like the BLM movement to consider changes to their use of language. Try alternate words like “reform” the police. Or try word qualifiers like “Camden” defund the police. Or try newly invented words like “floydund” the police or whatever to change the trajectory of the public discourse. I would also reconsider recent efforts to change the Webster’s Dictionary meaning of the word “racism” into one with a unidirectional power dynamic component to it. Maybe introduce a phrase like “racially insensitive” into the vernacular to replace the “racist” label that is used so often. This isn’t about capitulation. This is about the efficacy of an activist movement’s communication. A large majority of Americans are moderate-minded people inclined to favor institutions of law and order. The reality is that more of their support is needed to force Democratic Party political leaders of all levels (local, state, national), as well as black community leaders, to enact positive change in multiple areas (police relations, economic class politics, stable black family structures…yeah yeah I know, that last one is supposed to be a white nationalist talking point…).
A very personal example of how the misuse of words can derail a movement: Bernie’s 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns. As you know, “socialism” in America is a word hopelessly laden with all sorts of residual Cold War fearmongering that the more successful American progressive/populist movements of the early twentieth century didn’t have to worry about. Bernie’s campaign was a top-down organization that had no excuse for failing to control the language in a national discussion. I would have used “social democracy” and dropped “socialism” altogether. And to be more precise, social democracy should be differentiated with a qualifier like “permanent” or “finalized” social democracy since the original meaning of this phrase is supposed to represent a transitional stage on the way to replacing capitalism for good. I once recommended rebranding with newly invented singular words like “Bolshevista” to represent transitional social democracy and “Sandernista” to represent our permanent version. These did not catch on because I was a lowest-level campaign volunteer and because no one ever listens to me. But maybe when dealing with time-sensitive political movements, sometimes it’s just best to stick with more familiar word qualifiers to convey your message. Example: I often use country qualifiers to clarify nuanced political positions I have. Sometimes I’ll call myself a supporter of German-style socialism. Hmmm but I can see how that could be misconstrued, so I should stop doing that.
Well you made me chuckle a few times anyway. Yes you should finish The Wire, it pays off very nicely.
I disagree on changing words to the benefit of people deliberately distorting their meaning. Bernie using socialism was and is accurate; the fact that it is scary because of McCarthyist remnants is a complication but doesn't change the meaning of the word, just the understanding. It would be like saying it's unacceptable for Christians to call themselves that, because of all of the horrible murders and crusades carried out in Christ's name. Right?
"Defund" is correct. "Abolish" is correct. There is no true need for "police." There is a need for social workers and forward-thinking specialized teams to handle and resolve the root causes of civil unrest and crime. Don't take my word for it. I highly recommend spending time with both this essay AND the comments section to listen to police officers calling for both "defund" and "abolish". https://medium.com/@OfcrACab/confessions-of-a-former-bastard-cop-bb14d17bc759
In a society where everybody's basic needs are met -- which if we do the math.... carry the 1..... yes, in the RICHEST COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY OF HUMAN CIVILIZATION... we should be able to provide this easily. And still send Elon Musk to Mars without a problem.
-
1
-
-
Just now, The Poojer said:
thanks for that information. Everytime i watch him i ask myself why i have yet to really immerse myself into his whole body of work. He's almost Carlinesque....humor that makes you cringe and laugh at the same time
Yes!! I definitely feel a Carlin vibe from him too. Which is funny in a way because Carlin was very much the opposite. He's on a tight script and doesn't deviate; he's more like a one man show.
Dave is a rambling smoker... it's still weird to see him all buffed out, lol. I still can't help but see him as the skinny stoner guy. Like imagine suddenly Richard Pryor or Carlin getting ripped. It'd be weird! I'm glad he's in good health just saying.
Also... I would love to see more Chris Rock and Eddie Murphy standup. I know Eddie has been considering it. And as much as I love Dave, for me there was nobody funnier than Rock in his heyday in the late 90s / early 00s. Those HBO specials really hold up.
I just think their voices would really be welcome right now! I miss them being more active.
-
Just now, westside2 said:
You have a far greater chance to be killed by another black person if you are black. Saying police on black crime is a ongoing trend when black on black crime is out of control. Is a bit disingenuous at best.
Any person unnecessarily killed by police is tragic. Tragedy doesn't have a color. Your fixation on making this about the pigment of a person's skin is very telling about your frame of mind.
I suggest you stop playing the victim and realize the only one holding you back is you.
Get your mind right. You're heading down a dangerous path.
Okay. So, do black lives matter? Or because black people kill black people, their lives don't matter? Unclear what your point is here.
I'm not sure you'd recognize a dangerous path if it were boiling the skin off of your feet, but I appreciate the concern. Do black lives matter less than white lives?
Another way to think of it. Everyone is saying this is so obvious. In what ways is it clear that black lives matter in America?
Just now, Warren Zevon said:You are shying away from a $25 donation to a charity that supports racial justice in your community. That's unfortunate. I think you have been shying away since Friday, if I recall.
Longer! Jim has been running from himself his entire life. He's afraid of asking questions he doesn't want to know the answer to.
1 minute ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:I'm certain because you asked the question. Something drove you to type out the characters and click the green submit reply button. It could be as simple as you were curious, or perhaps you wanted to see who disagreed to follow up with further questions, but you instead chose to deny any purpose whatsoever which casts complete doubt on the entire thing. Why be so deceptive?
I don't understand. You're certain my question has a purpose? It's true, yes, communication has a purpose. Your communication here, also serving a purpose. Questions, purposeful, indeed.
Do black lives matter? Why would I be asking this, do you think? What am I after, do you suppose?
-
Just now, SoCal Deek said:
Then your problem rests solely with the police....not with the American public at large. I don’t know of ANY statistics that show random unarmed black people are being repeatedly killed by random white people.
This is a very convenient fiction to insist upon, because it completely removes any responsibility from you. It's not your problem. Not your concern. You don't need to worry about being part of the solution. It's also very lazy.
Statistics are interesting. Have you heard of the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921? Yes, a long time ago. Do you know why I'd bring that up regarding the statistics you're looking for?
-
4 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:
No, it really doesn't. I know you really want it to, but it simply doesn't. When a question is posed with that kind of specificity there is always a purpose.
Why's that? I find certainty to be very interesting. You are very certain. What makes you so?
Just now, Warren Zevon said:Go ask why most people don't post on PPP. It's not because of the politics, it's because of the racism.
Bingo. PPP is an embarrassment. It's time to civilize this place from the savages, eh?
-
9 minutes ago, Doc said:
Yes they do matter. As lives do. They don't start mattering/more on the rare occasions when an unarmed black person is killed by a cop (be they white, black or Latino).
When murdering innocent unarmed black people is an ongoing trend for generations, and there is repeatedly no justice and no concern unless there are protests and riots to insist on it, then that would imply that black lives don't matter. Because it seems like the country doesn't care, unless forced to confront it. So it's not something that is being very clearly communicated, if it is indeed one of our American cultural values that people who are alive have value.
10 minutes ago, westside2 said:Do white lives matter?
Just curious, what put this in doubt for you? Did the existence of the phrase "black lives matter" put a threat to white lives mattering?
Fascinating in the way "BLM" just reveals everyone's character like this.
-
1 minute ago, Foxx said:
put in context... you're an idiot and a disingenuous one at that.
Good one! Those videos are pretty interesting. The books, aside from the cliffs notes, even moreso! If you can haaaandle ittttttt
-
14 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:
Not really. In his last season in SF, he was not the week 1 starter and subsequently was benched two more times for Gabbert. Then, as they were about to cut him, he opted out of his contract.
Why would Kaeprnick be a more attractive pick up than Cam Newton?
You're right he was losing the job to Gabbert, but again, still seems like a reasonable request to me. If I were his lawyer or agent, I'd advise the same.
I don't know why Cam hasn't been signed either although in that case I think it's an injury concern. I agree he's a valuable commodity; I think the Bills should've taken a chance on him. No reason it should have to be so divisive if everyone is just on the same page. Josh has earned default QB1 status, and Cam would be the best QB2 in the league, not to mention obviously physically he and Josh are very similar. Of all locker rooms, seems like he'd have the best chance to succeed in Buffalo.
But Cam might not be interested in QB2 and insist on a starting job outright, though. So that would be one reason why. They're different players.
3 minutes ago, nucci said:He didn't decide to leave. 49ers told him he was going to be released so he opted out. Not sure how well he can play after missing so many years but he didn't suck when he played. Do you really think he's not as good or better than Barkley, Glennon, Hoyer.....
FWIW, Kaep's arm and athleticism have all looked good in his workout videos. Obviously that's different from game time.
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, Foxx said:
can i say that this thread was started in bad faith?
I'd be curious to know what you think that means
-
Just now, BuffaloHokie13 said:
So is your answer Bills fans? If you aren't trying to convince anyone then what is the purpose of the question?
Just asking the question. Do black lives matter? Seems like a difficult question for a lot of people in PPP, which is odd... in my experience most people see this one as a "gimme" in terms of basic philosophical questions. Do black lives matter?
-
Just now, BuffaloHokie13 said:
Who, exactly, are you trying to convince?
I'm just asking a question, curious to know how my fellow Bills fans think. Do black lives matter?
-
Just now, BringBackFergy said:
It was my understanding that he was looking for “starter” money two years ago. If you compete for a job, you don’t get signed for starter money. Imagine if he was signed to a large contract and then cut after training camp? Hoping he signs with a team to a reasonable contract, competes for a job and contributes to a team’s success.
Well yeah, two years ago I think he would be entitled to requesting starter money, since his last job was a starter. But now given that it's been some time, seems like an unlikely request on his end. Haven't seen any indication that that's his mindset. Tbh, I don't think he is in it for the money. Requesting starter money in the initial unemployment before it was clear he was being blacklisted was more about respect and not accepting the, frankly, bullying that was being insisted that he deserved less money because of the "distraction."
Anyway, yeah, I too would love to see a Kaep revenge tour. I can definitely imagine him inspiring the right team as a leader.
-
3 minutes ago, BringBackFergy said:
Will Kaepernick agree to “compete” for a job or will he want a job handed to him? That seems to be the question. If he wants to compete for a job, that’s great. I hope he makes a comeback. But a team can’t just sign him based on societal pressure. That weakens his original message.
I can't imagine Kaep would be getting or expecting any outright starting offers given that he's been out of the league for several years. Where was it said that he wouldn't compete for a job and want it handed to him?
I'd assume if he signs with the Chargers, Anthony Lynn would make it an open competition. The rookie, Tyrod, and Kaep.
Also unclear about how his signing would have anything to do with his original message, or how it weakens it?
-
1
-
-
Momentum is building toward Kaepernick returning to the NFL. Roger Goodell has officially encouraged NFL teams to sign Kaep, and also offered him an open-ended invitation to join the NFL league's office to fight racial injustice.
What an opportunity to test our TSW prognosticators. Here's a story that's headed toward some type of ending and new beginning. What do you think will happen? Or what should happen?
Here's what I think should happen. Kaepernick would be a perfect fit for the LA Chargers.
Why?
—Chargers need a reason for people to care about them. They are easily Los Angeles most forgettable team.
—LA is a very pro-Kaepernick city, as opposed to say, Nashville or Buffalo or Jacksonville
—The new stadium in Inglewood would absolutely sell more tickets with Kaepernick playing, just on principle he would receive support, even if they go 0-16
—For as much as the Spanos family are garbage, they owe the NFL for helping them get such a prime relocation after failing to get a new San Diego stadium... they would owe it to the NFL to take "the risk" of signing Kaep.
Despite a certain moderator with a Christmas Story avatar mocking this suggestion in the "Kaep to NE" thread, apparently I'm not the only one to think the Chargers make sense for Kaep -- https://boltbeat.com/2020/06/15/la-chargers-colin-kaepernick-flier/
Anyway. What do you think will happen?
-
1
-
-
-
1 minute ago, LB3 said:
Why is the topic "black on black crime" and the article used to support your premise about black on white crime being a white supremacist lie.
Ignoring the fact that the SPLC is a biased organization, the article doesn't really touch on black on black crime other than a graphic. The article does go on to say that science is racist. So it's got that going for it. Which is nice.
In what way is the SPLC a biased organization? Which organization do you think is unfairly labeled by them? And are you paying dues?
The article does very much "touch" on "black on black crime" it is, again, very thorough and contextual with over 70 sources. It's very clear.
And yes, if you don't understand the history of science and medicine, that might be surprising. That it's surprising to you shouldn't be surprising to me since you've yet to demonstrate a knowledge of history that would pass a 9th grade entrance exam.
-
2
-
-
Also @Reality Check you are even stupider than you think.... hahahahaha you wanted people to protest for the cops upset stomaches
AND THEY LIED ABOUT IT
hahahahahaha this is what you were concerned about
hahahahahahha you are so ***** dumb RC hahahahahahhaa
-
14 minutes ago, Reality Check said:
No one will be protesting over this.
Ohhh did da widdle coppies get some bad poo poos?
It's the most productive they've been in weeks. Also, RC, I love you so much for setting yourself for this brilliantly you little dunce
-
1
-
-
-
21 hours ago, The Poojer said:
I didn't realize he wrote on stage, that's pretty fricking amazing and now that you say it it makes total sense...i just thought it was his presentation that gave that impression. He is one funny SOB! Also had no clue he was from Ohio, thought he was a big city guy.
Damn, that was a great set. Wasn't comedy by any means but he delivered a pretty strong message.
He does a lot of long sets to build up, so he can ramble and find his ideas as he goes. There's twitter video somewhere of him basically asking the crowd for suggestions on topics and finding great material that way.
It can be a really bad approach to comedy in most hands, but comics like Chappelle who've been doing it so long, it's like a second language. He can just organize and present his thoughts with comedy timing and rhythm and logic even when he's just working through thinking things out. Even in this video if you watch it more than once, you see how — the laughter isn't there because this is all very raw, emotionally, there's no distance — but he focuses on the absurdity, in his cadence, his language. It's all in comedy language, even though it doesn't feel like comedy because of the rawness. You can almost imagine this same material, a year from now, in a larger venue, but all of these lines getting big laughs, even as dark as the subject matter is. This is like an open mic set in a way. It's really interesting!
Glad you liked it. But yeah Dave is always been a small town guy at heart. He's a really interesting one. Remember back in like 2005ish or so when Chappelle's Show ended unexpectedly? He basically freaked out because of the intense amount of new fame and ran away for awhile to re-center himself. This was obviously the smart decision. Look at any person who stays famous for long periods of time at that level of intensity... they all go insane.
Fame is corrosive to the brain. I think Dave realized that, along with other things. It's cool to see that since then he's pretty much stayed in Yellow Springs, OH, travels a bit for comedy but otherwise is really just a guy in Ohio lol. At least thats the story I hear second/third-hand from Dayton-area people.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Teddy KGB said:
Does derp da derpa ?
Does Fitzy air it out?
Goodell opens door for Kaepernick return. How will this end? Take your bets!
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I honestly see it as a no-lose situation for the Chargers... I live in the region, commutable distance from the new stadium. I honestly can't imagine ever wanting to see a Chargers game, maybe a Rams game but the Chargers? Unless the Bills were playing them, or the tickets were free...
BUT honestly with Kaepernick, that storyline is just way too good. I would immediately be more interested in the Chargers over the Rams as my "number two" team... because, with someone big like Kaep, combined with a lot of the ex-Bills -- Lynn, Tyrod -- also the Chargers GM is from Buffalo.
It just seems like a no brainer, imo. It's also his best chance at a starting job. AFC West is a tough division but wildcard would certainly be possible for Chargers, if they can get good QB play.
And as I've said before, Tyrod is on my good list forever. Same with Fitzy. They did no wrong to me, imo. They weren't perfect but that's fine, they played their hearts out and they earned the love. That's what I like seeing from Bills fans isn't pettiness but more of like a pan-Buffalo love, lol