ESPN *tried* to take Jemele Hill off the air...and failed.

[reddogblitz]

I hate when autocorrect changes my correct words to other correct words that throw throw the conversation out of context and makes me look like an idiot. I'm not saying I'm and idiot, but I could be perceived as an idiot.

You gotta proof read your post before hitting send. Maybe Even fix what's wrong too.

[Numark3]

 

But...you are a moron.

Haha probably, it wouldn't surprise me. But I wouldn't call any of you a moron based on a page of forum posts lol. Especially based on an autocorrect, but it's an argument y'all want to have.

 

Agreeance is a word - deal with it. I'll keep my liberal nice job though, someone spell checks for me to be honest! I truly can't spell!

You gotta proof read your post before hitting send. Maybe Even fix what's wrong too.

Absolutely...when it matters, not on forum posts lol. Edited September 16, 2017 by Crayola64

[Taro T]

I can show you 500 judicial opinions with "agreeance" so gtfo . So please don't tell me it's not a word. Supreme Court justices use it, federal court of apppeals, and so forth... it's not an argument you want to have, so don't call me a moron unless you want to have it.

Judicial opionions, not urban dictionary child

But...you are a moron.

Haha probably. But I wouldn't call any of you a moron based on a page of forum posts lol. Especially based on an autocorrect, but it's an argument y'all want to have.

Agreeance is a word - deal with it. I'll keep my liberal nice job though, someone spell checks for me to be honest! I truly can't spell!

 

Absolutely...when it matters, not on forum posts lol.

Well, if an authority as highly regarded as Google says it's a word, who's to argue? Especially seeing as how your day job is arguing before the Supreme Court.

[Numark3]

 

Well, if an authority as highly regarded as Google says it's a word, who's to argue? Especially seeing as how your day job is arguing before the Supreme Court.

Google says it's a word, Supreme Court, court of appeals, what's your point? I thought you were a better poster than jumping into a topic and saying something dumb, but I guess I was wrong. I'll wait Taro.

[DC Tom]

Google says it's a word, Supreme Court, court of appeals, what's your point? I thought you were a better poster than jumping into a topic and saying something dumb, but I guess I was wrong. I'll wait Taro.

 

Google says cromulent is a word, too.

[Taro T]

Google says it's a word, Supreme Court, court of appeals, what's your point? I thought you were a better poster than jumping into a topic and saying something dumb, but I guess I was wrong. I'll wait Taro.

Well, as long as Google says it's a word, guess you're cromulent.

[Numark3]

 

Google says cromulent is a word, too.

I honestly dont care about google (which agrees with me). In my job we use it, there are plenty of judicial opinions that use it. Do i need to cite to one to shut you up? That would be easy... Honestly, I wouldn't get in an argument about whether or not it is a word with me, words and semantics are something I argue about for a living , so I am better than you at it, no offense. Agreeance is a word, and when I am so sober, tomorrow, I'll prove it

 

Taro, DC tom, peace till then lol

 

 

Just for a preview, a recent 11th circuit opinion in the past year uses it from a 5 second google search. Cite is U.S. v. Thomas, 656 Fed.Appx 951 ( you can find it here, http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/files/201512101.pdf ) It took 5 seconds, maybe we jsut use it in the legal profession, idk. But we do. And I think we might be right over some goofy TBD forum posters.

 

 

But please keep telling me its not a word lol ( sorry for being an ass, but you both are ignorantly and incorrectly telling me something isn't a word that is, and it's hitting a nerve. I have no idea how this argument began from a joke, other than someone saying it's not a word and 10 people falsely believing it, including you two goofs. Again, I use the word plenty as do others, evidence is in judges and courts using it too. Enough said)

Edited September 16, 2017 by Crayola64

[DC Tom]

 

I honestly dont care about google (which agrees with me). In my job we use it, there are plenty of judicial opinions that use it. Do i need to cite to one to shut you up? That would be easy... Honestly, I wouldn't get in an argument about whether or not it is a word with me, words and semantics are something I argue about for a living , so I am better than you at it, no offense. Agreeance is a word, and when I am so sober, tomorrow, I'll prove it

 

Taro, DC tom, peace till then lol

 

 

Just for a preview, a recent 11th circuit opinion in the past year uses it from a 5 second google search. Cite is U.S. v. Thomas, 656 Fed.Appx 951 ( you can find it here, http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/files/201512101.pdf ) It took 5 seconds, maybe we jsut use it in the legal profession, idk. But we do. And I think we might be right over some goofy TBD forum posters.

 

 

But please keep telling me its not a word lol ( sorry for being an ass, but you both are ignorantly and incorrectly telling me something isn't a word that is, and it's hitting a nerve. I have no idea how this argument began from a joke, other than someone saying it's not a word and 10 people falsely believing it, including you two goofs)

 

It's a perfectly cromulent word, as I said.

[Numark3]

Haha ok. I use it and so do others in my professsion...a lot. Go back to a Simpson's joke. lol you were just joking right!? Like I said, I'm right, you are wrong, it's no big deal. It's a word

Edited September 16, 2017 by Crayola64

[Taro T]

Haha ok. I use it and so do others in my professsion...a lot. Go back to a Simpson's joke. lol you were just joking right!? Like I said, I'm right, you are wrong, it's no big deal. It's a word

Well as long as we're in agreeMENT that you're being daft about an imaginary word, we're all good.

[JoPar_v2]

Whoa haven't browsed PPP in a while; are people really in here claiming "agreeance" isn't a word? That's all just trolling right?

[grinreaper]

Whoa haven't browsed PPP in a while; are people really in here claiming "agreeance" isn't a word? That's all just trolling right?

Read the whole thread. This issue started out with aggreanacsa being used instead of agreeance. It was claimed that autocorrect was the culprit which is a pretty lame excuse for not proofing ones post. Then it was stated that agreance was the proper spelling. Then it was stated that it wasn't a word. Some pretty smart people are either just busting balls or really have lost a few pencils out of their boxes.

[Nanker]

Haha ok. I use it and so do others in my professsion...a lot. Go back to a Simpson's joke. lol you were just joking right!? Like I said, I'm right, you are wrong, it's no big deal. It's a word

thats mighty bigly of you. And Neil Gorsuch would agree, no doubt. Ain't that sumpfin!

[RaoulDuke79]

You gotta proof read your post before hitting send. Maybe Even fix what's wrong too.

Ain't noby got time for tjat.

[Rob's House]

It's a pretty shwag word that's only used by pretentious ass holes who want to sound esoteric or, ironically, morons who don't know the difference.

 

In any case, it shouldn't detract from the magnificent display of retardation that Apussaholeski and Freddie Jizzstain put on right before Chester derailed the thread.

[Augie]

Does Jamele Hill use that word?

[/dev/null]

Refresh my memory. Who was Trump's Final Four picks?

I must have missed the ESPN Presidential Bracket show in 2017

[DC Tom]

Refresh my memory. Who was Trump's Final Four picks?

 

I believe he picked Bavaria State to annihilate Guernica in the finals.

[boyst]

He is getting **** for not using proper grammar and spelling. Meanwhile, no one gives gives a **** when I make no revisions.

 

This is either good or bad. But he enflamed it much much more by replying to it.

 

I just admit I'm lazy and don't care.

 

Skis ushe jeie uauen lyodbe oduws yeeeepppp

[B-Man]

PJ Media's Stephen Kruiser did an excellent job this week pointing out the double standards employed by ESPN in the Jemele Hill controversy. ESPN executives treated Linda Cohn and Curt Schilling far differently, for similar — or lesser — offenses. In Cohn's case, it was merely acknowledging the point that ESPN is ignoring its constituency, leading to a suspension:

ESPN stalwart

Linda Cohn lamented

the network's non-sports wander into politics in an interview last spring, noting that the "core group" of viewers who made ESPN so successful were being ignored.

 

 

Schilling was fired outright for retweeting a meme indicating his agreement with North Carolina's bathroom law. Hill, on the other hand, received a reprimand for calling the president of the United States a white supremacist. Hill's non-apology apology only made things worse:

My comments on Twitter expressed my personal beliefs. My regret is that my comments and the public way I made them painted ESPN in an unfair light. My respect for the company and my colleagues remains unconditional.

 

 

Let us be crystal clear on this point: Hill is not sorry that she offended at least half the country. Schilling offended a minority of Americans. Cohn merely acknowledged, without taking a side either way, that some of their audience had bled off because of politics. Schilling got fired; Cohn was suspended; Hill was on the air the very next day.

Is it any wonder that right-thinking people are turning off ES(JW)PN?