Jauronimo

This is a good starting place: https://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2011/11/real-texas-chili-con-carne.html Except I will add more chilie de arbols and chipotles than called for. Do a mix of ground beef and beef cubes. I add crushed tomatoes sometimes. Black beans or pinto beans might make it in the mix but NO kidney beans. Sometimes I like to toss in some bacon or smoked ham hocks. The key to exceptional chili is using a variety of freshly ground chile powders or using whole dried smoked chilies. If you have a generic "chili powder" in your spice cabinet, toss it out. That stuff is a mixture of all sorts of peppers and other spices.

And this is a point I agree on. Fromm doesn't owe Marcel anymore of an answer than he gave. Fromm will want to watch Josh Allen and brush up on his media skills if he ever wants to be the guy.

He gave an opinion that didn't answer the question. Reporter (Paraphrasing): People are looking at the Kaepernick protests over police brutality, the issue has emerged again, the topic of kneeling during the anthem i being discussed. How should the NFL respond and what is your responsibility to your teammates as a leader on your team and and leader in the league? Brees: I will never agree with anybody disrespecting the flag. [speech about his family's military service, what the anthem means to him, and how it moves him to tears] No one was offended about what the flag means to Brees. Spinning it that way is dishonest. People were upset with Brees, notably his teammates and NFL brethren, because he avoided the issue and waved the flag.

The unacceptable part has already been addressed many times by participants in this thread and the Marcel himself. The bolded has nothing to do with it. That's the conclusion you and others jumped to on page 1. I am not countering this strawman again.

So would I. And people may criticize. I probably wouldn't make awkward segue into what the flag means to me in the process, however.

Brees dodged a question and then wrapped himself in the flag. Similarly to the Fromm situation, people were quick to change the story and focus on any criticism of Brees' comments as anti-flag and anti-american rather than accept that people were dissatisfied with him for avoiding the real question. There is a power in deflecting and then waving the flag or your religion.

If my texts were revealed to the public I would jobless, homeless, and likely deported.

I am getting concerned that those who DO share Fromm's worldview (or what they think his worldview is based on his brief comments) cannot admit he copped out and even after he said he wasn't going to answer the question. They have equated any questioning of his response to an attack on his religion. If you say anything that can be construed as scripture I guess we all lose our right to criticize lest commit heresy.

LOL. Add it to the TBDisms thread. You'll never guess who slept through Sunday school?

I have no problem with him tossing his faith into his lack of response. I have an issue with everyone who cannot admit that he dodged the question, which is painfully clear, and instead want to argue about the profundity of "i think the world can be a better place if we can love god first and then love people". He may as well have said the world can be a better place if we recycle. Both statements are true, as deep as a bumper sticker, and only tangentially related to the question.

If you're generally curious, you can actually read Marcel's own explanation of his use of the term "unacceptable" instead of furthering your baseless he's anti-Christian and doesn't respect the Bible or Fromm's faith hypothesis. That might help, as inconvenient as you may find it.

Fromm quoted scripture in the loosest sense of the word "quoted" after he declared his intent not to answer the question. That is Jake Fromm's problem. Quoting scripture, poorly I might add, is not inherently a good answer to all questions. Scripture is not a get out of jail free card and it is pure and total crap when you hide behind scripture to avoid answering difficult questions. You can duck a question without bringing your faith into the matter.

You calling out FireChans?? Should we call you BigDoc? #GetchaHeatMapsReady

Its a perfect analogy. The insensitive language was used in an email meant for one person who then ratted me out.

I got called in front of my boss for using some racially insensitive language. When asked what I learned from a few weeks of sensitivity training and how I will change my behavior in the future I dropped the old "I'm not going to get into that, but I will say I'm focused on loving God and deepening my relationship with Christ". I was let go!!!! I am now suing Chick Fil A Corporate for their anti-Christian agenda.

Not if the player says anything remotely Christian no matter how cryptic or how badly butchered. Once that happens, everyone forfeits their right to criticism. UNLESS that player has just turned the ball over 5 times in one half of football. In that case, something like, I don't know, this: "“At the end of day I know where my true identity lies: in Christ. ... Being a child of God, basically. Not finding my identity in football." doesn't even come close to an acceptable response to "what did you learn from your performance today?".

100% agree. Fromm doesn't owe Marcel or the public a dissertation on BLM, police brutality, social justice or anything else.

Marcel didn't disrespect Fromm's faith. Only a person with a persecution complex would suggest otherwise.

Once again, that is your unsupportable interpretation of the words. The only interpretation based on the quoted words is that Marcel is not a christian or doesn't believe the Bible is valid? If Marcel was a Christian he wouldn't view Fromm's admission that he wasn't going to get political as a dodge? Father forgive whatdrought for he know not what he done.

No. Where in quote above did he give his opinion on current events?

No, thats actually what you're saying. Marcel is saying Fromm, given his leaked texts, owes everyone a real answer as to what he believes about the protests and social justice issues and not some generalized statements about loving God. I do not agree that Marcel or the public is entitled to a full answer but lets not pretend Fromm didn't dodge the question when he specifically says the last thing he is going to do is get political. “There’s a lot of things going on and the last thing I want to do is get political in any sort of way, but I think the world would be a better place if we can love God first and then love people.”

Fromm's response was pure crap. Love God first and people second?? You act like hes quoting the sermon on the mound. He used his faith as a shield to avoid a difficult question and some act like any string of words remotely spiritual is sacred text. He basically said "Jesus is just alright with me, jesus is just alright oh yeah".

All this post says to me is that you can dodge a question with some vaguely spiritual crap and that will be above reproach for many people. MLJ: What do you have to say about throwing 6 INTs today in a blowout loss? Fromm: Thou shalt protect thy father and honor no one above him unless it beith me, thy sweet Lord! MLJ: That's a ***** answer. Bills Fans: Marcel is a heretic!

This could not possibly be deduced from the actual text. Where does he disagree with Fromm's worldview? Marcel doesn't like Fromm's answer because Fromm dodged the question entirely. Marcel believes its "unacceptable" but I don't think Fromm owes him or anyone else a better response. He could certainly help himself by giving a real answer, however.

Your choices are 0 or +10.