JoshAllenHasBigHands

I hated Trump when he got the Republican ticket (I still do, that is not the direction the party should be going). I found his claim that the media lies or is biased against him gross. However, after he got elected, stuff like this kept happening. Even when COVID started, it was so easy to compare what CNN and others were representing Trump as having said v. what he actually said/happened, and I realized CNN was being intentionally misleading.

I agree. It wasn't a good take, in any event. But not knowing the history really surprised me. I know Goodwin cares deeply about black oppression, and he has visited Egypt with Kaep before to learn about African strength. I would think he be more well read than to think Jewish oppression is isolated to the Holocaust.

In situations like these, its better to amplify the voices of people saying the right thing than those of the people saying the harmful thing.

This was a fire response

Wow. He still isn't on a team?

Its like Robert Downing Jr. in Tropic Thunder.

I got the impression he was using the term ironically to illustrate how outdated and offensive it is.

Goodwin spends alot of time with Kaep. I promise you, he gets most of what he says from Kaep.

I'm not suggesting you did. But I am saying, and this is from my perspective, is that the statistics on these issues typically lead to surprise.

A deeper look at the statistics behind a good deal of the claims being made following Floyd's death reveals numerous misleading narratives.

At one point in the comments he suggested that Jews didn't have it as bad as black people because it is 9 million deaths (the holocaust) v. 100 million deaths (the slave trade). It was breathtaking.

How can systemic racism be real, we elected a black president! See what I'm saying? Btw, most of what people use to justify calling Trump either far-right or a racist are just policies that Trump continued from prior administrations. The allegation is way overblown. Like it was when Bush was president, or when Romney and McCain ran for president. I think the moment you have Noam Chomsky signing on to an open letter calling for an end to cancel culture, the concept should be accepted as more than just a straw-man.

They are more violent, but have less staying power. That's all I'm saying.

Yeah, I agree with that. I've always been less concerned with the far-right, because, at the end of the day, they mostly exist in the back woods and outside the public eye. I 100% understand that is not universally true, but I don't regard them as a growing segment of our population. Conversely, the far-left is born and bread in our college institutions, and to a lesser extent our public schools, places where you have to go to be successful, and where you have to comport to do well. To be clear, they are both really bad, and I LOVE that "meet around the back" comment, as it is so true. I'm just saying that, moving forward, one scares me more than the other. But you are right, we've become super radicalized. Use of the staw-man, which formerly was regarded as a bad logical fallacy, is now the basic premise of every political argument.

I use the term DNA because I mean exactly that: at a fundamental level. We will balk whenever we are told what to do. From a policy perspective, and after you get into the minuta of government, we are not a libertarian country.

Libertarianism is in our DNA

Surrrre, quote my really stupid typo.... Yeah, I don't think there is a credible argument that there is not a strong wave of support in this country for fundamentally changing our way of life. Five years ago, people who made this suggestion were mocked as conspiracy theorists and white nationalists. Now that it has come to fruition, the people waving the flag are mocked as racists and idiots for not believing that this needs to happen.

Many of the far-left movements of today ascribe to the belief that it is not about the ends but the means. In other words, the criticism must be perpetual, and to fuel the movement, there must always be an ever present "boogey-man." Though never explicitly said, this is the basic premise of most critical pedagogies. It sort of makes sense, too, when you consider that the thing they are fighting is "systemic." Absent destroying the system, which most agree will never happen, the only recourse is to stay in a critique posture. The problem is that, eventually, it stops becoming about achieving and overcoming, but maintaining a constant state of protest.

That isn't really my point. My point is that we are so obsessed about what is and is not racist, we forgot that what really makes it so problematic is the behaviors that undergird racism -- prejudice, discrimination, bigotry -- go completely unchallenged. Like, fine, black people cannot be racist in the sense that they are an oppressed group and white people have not suffered 100 of years of discrimination. But they can still be prejudiced, discriminatory, and bigoted, and demonstrate all the messed up and terrible beliefs that presuppose and justify the dehumanizing outcome of racism. Fine, Jackson cannot be racist, but he can still be all the f-ed up things that make racism bad.

"Black people can't be racist." Fine. But boy does it excuse all kinds of really f-ed up behavior and beliefs.

Are you talking about from the team's perspective, because insurance doesn't affect the cap implications.

I don't think it will be that massive on a per-year basis.

Well, the new cba was just signed... Sorry, my tense are all messed up. What I was saying is that those players that wanted short deals were negotiating pre-cba. Mahomes is now post-cba.

I think that is about the upcoming cba negotiations. They don't want to tie themselves down to something that will last past the new cba, which may open up the path for them to get substantially more money.

Players are at great risk for injury. They want longer contracts with more guaranteed money so if anything happens they know they are taken care of.