Rob's House

Bringing politics into sports just divides us further. Sports is one thing that brings people of different backgrounds together. It's a unifying bond that allows people who may disagree on any number of things to find a common bond. The problem for some is that when you bond with someone over a shared interest, you start to see their humanity. You realize that despite your differences, you are both decent people with families, feelings, passions, and dreams. If you talk to them long enough you may learn that your differences are quite nuanced based on a different interpretation of complex issues that are presented with cartoon-like simplicity in the political arena. That would be unfortunate for the people who thrive on civil unrest. I think one thing we can all agree on is that the media loves to promote conflict and divisiveness. We may disagree on their motives, but we can all agree on that. This is just one more way to stoke the flames and drive us even further apart into our already disturbingly entrenched camps.

If the position is nearly impossible to support, why are you so confident it's correct? The problem with nearly all these arguments is that they're based purely on conjecture, cliches, and anecdotal evidence. That is the exact opposite of the scientific method. Hypotheticals are nothing more than conjecture supported by the speakers own bias. Anecdotes give no frame of reference for scale. They grossly over or underrepresent the phenomenon being depicted. Everyone understands this when Sean Hannity does it with illegal immigrants, but it's a different story when it fits the narrative. But This clearly unreliable method that is roundly rejected in all fields of study, is the foundation of "the most important issue facing our nation." Despite the glaring lack of supporting evidence, the mere suggestion that the perception of disparity may be an illusion sparks anger. The empirical evidence overwhelmingly suggests that any disparity that may exist is statistically negligible. I've scoured the internet for the last two weeks and have not seen one person attempt to support this conclusion with anything resembling the scientific method and empirical data. If you're not allowed to honestly question a theory it's usually because someone is afraid they don't have a good answer. Otherwise they'd welcome the question as an opportunity to explain their position instead of coming down on you with sanctimony and derision. Not everyone has the strength of character to honestly question and actively challenge their own core beliefs. It's much easier to demonize those who would challenge them for you.

The "civil war" is not between the races. Race is the wedge issue being exploited to initiate the conflict. Just as OJ, who distanced himself from the black community for most of his adult life, exploited race to influence his trial. The real question is, if OJ can get away with murder, why can't Oliver have a few drinks and drive home?

Just keep in mind, anything you post there could eventually be exposed. Whatever you do, don't joke about silencers and white privilege. It's far too serious to joke about.

Most of the dipshits complaining about Song of the South have never seen it and don't know the first thing about it. They just know some other dip shitz said it was racist and that was enough for them. Jake's already gone. They remade the commercial. Now Jake's black and they took out the punchline.

I'm in a similar situation. I don't want to marginalize myself, and I have "friends" in my professional community and don't want to get blackballed, but I can't stay silent. I will post things that are not too controversial in the comments section or on my main profile, and I make a point to like the posts of those with the balls to speak up so as to show support, but I started a closed group for people I trust where I can be more direct.

GG's right. They're not cooling off, they're escalating. That's why it's important that everyone do what they can in their own sphere of influence to push back, because they won't stop until they hit resistance, and right now they're not getting any. They're trying to create the impression that their movement has overwhelming support for 2 reasons. 1. To make people afraid to challenge them, and 2. Bandwagon effect. It's shown that people are instinctively inclined to adopt the beliefs they perceive as being held by the majority. That's why they skew polls. It's to influence others. I'm not suggesting anyone should tank their career and go out in a blaze of glory, but we need to do what we can to let other people know they're not alone. Outside of California, we're the majority. Even rational Democrats (oxymoron, I know) think this is getting out of hand. But we're being bullied into silence and compliance, and the weaker among us are getting swept away in the tide. If we sit quietly and wait for things to go back to normal we're going to be waiting until the cows come home. And the cows just hopped on a one way train to the slaughterhouse.

I didn't like it because, given the totality of the circumstances, I saw it as a statement that America is a racist country that oppresses minorities. I disagree with that assertion and I find it offensive. I don't demand his participation. I've never liked the compulsory pledge of allegiance. It's one's own personal decision as to what he pledges his allegiance. Nor do I want to force him to partake in the flag/anthem ceremony. And although it's not required, I do expect one to show enough courtesy and respect for those to whom that ceremony is sacred not to disrespect it. Rather than simply standing off to the side he intentionally and conspicuously drew attention to his show of defiance to what is an apolitical ceremony that essentially represents our freedom and unity as a nation. That he brought it into the football world, one I prefer to remain apolitical, was salt in the wound. The statement that he wasn't protesting the flag but was simply protesting police brutality rang hollow for me. It's not really about the flag itself, but what it represents. The flag and the anthem don't represent the police, they represent America as a whole. And given the totality of his statements, then and now, I think my assessment of his message was accurate. To be fair, if I believed that America was the awful bastion of racism and oppression he believes it to be I might find his actions courageous. In a sense, I still do. It takes courage to do something you know will offend people. However, when you do that you know people will be offended. He has every right to express his beliefs, just as I have the right to find his beliefs, and the expression of those beliefs, offensive. Just as many of you find my beliefs offensive. We don't have the right to determine what others think of us.

I think it has far less to do with appeasing the players as it does with adapting to changing public sentiments. The players can piss and moan, but as long as the check clears they're suiting up.

Personally, I think athletes have as much right to talk about politics as anyone else. BUT, I'd prefer they didn't do it on game day. Do all the interviews you want, give speeches, march in the streets, and Tweet until your heart's content, but it doesn't need to come into the game anymore than the guy working the counter at McDonald's needs to lecture me on the tenets of national socialism while I'm waiting for a Big Mac. We seem to agree here at TBD that sports and politics don't mix well. I don't see why it should be any different on the field. I am, however, willing to make an exception when the politics being espoused match my own.

Hard to say. I would've been inclined to think so, but I imagine most families have two working parents, which makes it difficult. Personally, I don't worry about it. I think if you teach them critical thinking skills and keep them engaged the teacher doesn't stand a chance.

Mostly on FB. I had a few that were SJW already, but they've taken it from mildly insane to batschit crazy. More disturbing is how many of the normals have jumped on the bandwagon. Most of my daughter's 12 year old friends have grown keenly aware of black oppression through their experience growing up in white, middle class suburbs. They know the struggle is real.

I keep seeing these girls (and emasculated guys) who read books like "White Fragility," basically the SJW version of Dianetics, and go from garden variety liberal to ultra woke zealot overnight. They're developing these woke cliques where they all celebrate each other's inane expressions of wokeness and earn status by declaring how disgusted they are with everyone who doesn't believe in the philosophy they picked up last week. It's like a zombie virus where you never know if the person who was normal a few weeks ago is going to pop up as a goddamn woke zombie tomorrow. It really is a cult.

I predict if the media is somehow able to get Sleepy Joe in office they'll nationalize the police force under the guise of reform. What better way to fight fascism?

Must Watch He's absolutely right. We have to keep our dignity and refuse to bow down. You will never appease the mob. They will always want more.

If this is the police brutality they're talking about I think I'm alright with it. Freedom to block the highway doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

Yes. Everyone is racist, which in an ironic twist means that no one is racist.

Just popped in to fulfill your request. This is a different survey with a little bit different wording and results (if I have time to dig the other one up I'll share) but it still supports the conclusion that a significant portion of the black community doesn't see racism as their greatest obstacle. That is all. Back to PPP. https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/19/white-liberals-african-americans-discriminated/

I wanted to go in the store the other day, but I didn't have a placebo mask and I didn't want to get arrested, so I tore the cardboard off the side of a box of beer and wrote "Black Lives Matter" on it. Mama didn't raise no fool.

I'm really tired of hearing people claiming they have a first amendment right to block the streets as part of their so-called "protest." There is no first amendment right to block traffic. As Milton "Keynes" Friedman once said, in explaining the natural limitations on the libertarian philosophy of freedom, my right to swing my fist freely is limited by the proximity of your chin. Just as my right to paint a message on a sign and display it does not extend to a right to spray paint that message on your house, my right to demonstrate does not extend to a right to illegally block the free movement of others. Intentionally blocking travelers on an open roadway, particularly when there is no option for a detour, is principally indistinguishable from Virginia’s definition of abduction. Va. Code § 18.2-47(a): Any person who, by force, …, and without legal justification or excuse, … detains … another person with the intent to deprive such other person of his personal liberty … shall be deemed guilty of "abduction." Personally, I have very little sympathy for anyone who blocks traffic as part of their protest. They have no idea what the consequences of their actions may be, but have unilaterally chosen to impose their will upon others. What if I’m on my way to the hospital with a child who is in agonizing pain with a compound fracture? Or perhaps I got the call that my dad is on his death bed and this is the last chance I’ll ever get to see him. Or maybe I’m on the way to check on a friend who is suffering from depression and just sent me a cryptic message hinting at suicide. Or maybe I’m on my way to the courthouse with a last-minute filing and my client’s claim will be lost if I can’t get there on time. Or maybe I’m just on my way home for a family event that is very important to my kids who I see far too infrequently because of my busy schedule. I could be in any one of these situations, or countless others, and unable to do anything about it because some self-righteous ####### decided his “right” to impose his will upon me is more important than whatever I may have going on. I’m not suggesting they “deserve to die”, but a mob blocking traffic is inherently threatening. I don’t judge anyone who, in reasonable fear for their own safety, drives through the crowd that chose to put themselves in that position. Additionally, if I’m looking for someone to burn sympathy calories on, the guy that decided to stand in traffic ain’t it.