Front Office Football Central

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)
-   Off Topic (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The Obama Presidency - 2008 & 2012 (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=69042)

EagleFan 10-23-2010 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 2369961)
To paraphrase, he's saying,

I'm nervous when I see people in Muslim garb because the fact is that the Muslims want to kill us all.


Wow, way to broad brush everything...

JPhillips 10-23-2010 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EagleFan (Post 2369960)
Look at it this way...

A serial killer is terrorizing an area and the only thing that the public know about him is that he wears a red hat. You are walking at night and when you tun the corner you see someone with a red hat walking towards you. What do you feel?

It's not bigotry, it's called being freaking human and having a survival instinct. The only people to be blamed for someone feeling nervous about seeing a muslim on a plane are the radicals that caused the problem in the first place.


So Muslims are serial killers?

That's just the point, a very small percentage of Muslims have committed acts of terror in the U.S. and not a single one of them was in Muslim garb.

btw- I tend to recall that you get rather testy when people accuse all Philadelphia fans of being unruly and violent. Can you not see the parallel?

JPhillips 10-23-2010 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EagleFan (Post 2369962)
Wow, way to broad brush everything...


How else do read this:

Quote:

He said the war with Muslims, America's war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don't think there's any way to get away from these facts.

EagleFan 10-23-2010 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 2369963)
So Muslims are serial killers?

That's just the point, a very small percentage of Muslims have committed acts of terror in the U.S. and not a single one of them was in Muslim garb.

btw- I tend to recall that you get rather testy when people accuse all Philadelphia fans of being unruly and violent. Can you not see the parallel?


When did I say that Muslims are serial killers? Can you freaking understand anything? I presented a fucking common sense point of view and you are fucking twisting every word.

EagleFan 10-23-2010 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 2369965)
How else do read this:


I don't really give a shit. I just wanted to try to present a logical view to demonstrate that everything is not "racism" as people love to label things. But then you start twisting my words to say that I said "Muslims are serial killers".

EagleFan 10-23-2010 01:47 PM

If I ever come in this thread again please have me commited. I try to present one freaking point without adding any goddamn opinion of my own and people (person) start twisting those words.

I present one logical reference to attempt to explain how someone could be concerned but that does not seem to be able to be comprehended so I give up.

JPhillips 10-23-2010 01:47 PM

Come on.

There is nothing similar about a serial killer in a red hat and people in Muslim garb unless you're implying that the danger level of a Muslim and a serial killer are somehow equivalent.

JPhillips 10-23-2010 01:53 PM

Williams himself should understand his bigotry given he wrote this:

Quote:

Neither black nor white store owners are in business to display the virtues of admitting people of all colors, creeds, and fashions to their stores. They are in business to make money. I would want to take precautions to prevent robbery; I would look closely at people entering the store. The race of a potential customer would be one factor among many to be considered as I girded myself against thieves.

But in Washington and almost all other major cities, blacks do patronize jewelry stores. A jeweler in Beverly Hills who closed his door to heavily bejeweled Mr. T would be foolishly closing his cash register. Unless I am a racist, race and age cannot be the sole deciding factors in calculating whom I will and will not let into my store. And I certainly would not close my door to, say, all young black men - not even to those who are casually dressed and behaving nervously. I would act cautiously in dealing with them, as I would with an antic, strangely dressed white man.

As a cabdriver I would apply the same considerations. Discrimination can be used judiciously. I would certainly exclude one class of people: those who struck me as dangerous. Nervous-looking people with bulges under their jackets would not be picked up; nor would those who looked obviously drunk or stoned. It all comes down to a subjective judgment of what dangerous people look like. This does not necessarily entail a racial judgment. Cabdrivers who don't pick up young black men as a rule are making a poorly informed decision. Racism is a lazy man's substitute for using good judgment.

Dutch 10-23-2010 02:19 PM

Wow, you remembered something Juan Williams said verbatim? That's impressive, I'll give you that.

JPhillips 10-23-2010 02:47 PM

I figure if you can keep track of everything the AP prints I can at least keep track of Juan Williams.

Greyroofoo 10-23-2010 02:51 PM

Can't we all just get along?

lungs 10-23-2010 03:59 PM

I'm really hoping the Democrats in Milwaukee get the Cigarettes for Votes program going again. We're going to need it this year.

stevew 10-23-2010 05:51 PM

I really don't care about my house race. Kathy Dahlkemper is getting a ton of money it seems. Her one add comparing Mike Kelley's tax plan as "teachers pay more taxes, Ray Lewis gets a tax cut". I'm not big on her attempt at class warfare. That kelly is a bad person cause he is wealthy.

However Sestak better beat Toomey the douche. Seems to be getting tight. Toomey has to be stopped now.

Dutch 10-23-2010 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lungs (Post 2370049)
I'm really hoping the Democrats in Milwaukee get the Cigarettes for Votes program going again. We're going to need it this year.


Don't forget the Black Panthers All Up In Your Grill program. That was highly effective as well!

lungs 10-23-2010 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dutch (Post 2370104)
Don't forget the Black Panthers All Up In Your Grill program. That was highly effective as well!


Voter intimidation is so Middle East. I'd hope we've moved beyond that and give cigarettes to homeless people.

In all seriousness, I did offer two of my friends a pack of cigarettes in exchange for a vote for Russ Feingold. Just doing my part.

RainMaker 10-23-2010 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dutch (Post 2370104)
Don't forget the Black Panthers All Up In Your Grill program. That was highly effective as well!

Don't forget the mindless sheep who believe everything they are told program.

Dutch 10-23-2010 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker (D) (Post 2370224)
Don't forget the mindless sheep who believe everything they are told program.


That's not a party-specific program!

RainMaker 10-23-2010 11:18 PM

Illinois has some nasty races for Governor and Senate. First time in awhile that we've had close races in such large races.

I think I'm going to go with Brady for Governor. He's still 100 years behind on a lot of social issues, but I don't think that's going to matter as Governor. Doesn't have a strong record on anything, but he's not a Democrat which is good right now. The Illinois House and Senate are extremely corrupt and tied in with Quinn and we just need someone in there who is going to fuck with them. I really don't like either candidate and have to bite my lip with the bigoted stuff from Brady, but the State can't afford more debt and Quinn just wants to borrow money and give it to everyone who will vote for him.

Kirk and Gianoulias is much tougher. Kirk is a moderate but that's mainly because he just follows whatever the political tide is. He was a Republican for the war, then he shifted to the left when the tide shifted in 2006 and 2008, now he's somehow a fiscal conservative again (which he's never been). He's got good experience which is good and bad. Gianoulias seems like a smart guy, but he's still real young. He's also in the "spend a ton of money" camp which I'm just against right now. I'm pretty split on the two and might not make up my mind till the actual election day.

sterlingice 10-24-2010 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 2370012)
I figure if you can keep track of everything the AP prints I can at least keep track of Juan Williams.


*snicker*

SI

Greyroofoo 10-24-2010 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 2370246)
Illinois has some nasty races for Governor and Senate. First time in awhile that we've had close races in such large races.

I think I'm going to go with Brady for Governor. He's still 100 years behind on a lot of social issues, but I don't think that's going to matter as Governor. Doesn't have a strong record on anything, but he's not a Democrat which is good right now. The Illinois House and Senate are extremely corrupt and tied in with Quinn and we just need someone in there who is going to fuck with them. I really don't like either candidate and have to bite my lip with the bigoted stuff from Brady, but the State can't afford more debt and Quinn just wants to borrow money and give it to everyone who will vote for him.

Kirk and Gianoulias is much tougher. Kirk is a moderate but that's mainly because he just follows whatever the political tide is. He was a Republican for the war, then he shifted to the left when the tide shifted in 2006 and 2008, now he's somehow a fiscal conservative again (which he's never been). He's got good experience which is good and bad. Gianoulias seems like a smart guy, but he's still real young. He's also in the "spend a ton of money" camp which I'm just against right now. I'm pretty split on the two and might not make up my mind till the actual election day.


I didn't know that Illinois had elections. I thought they just had auctions.

Dutch 10-24-2010 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 2370012)
I figure if you can keep track of everything the AP prints I can at least keep track of Juan Williams.


I guess a response was in order here, I've stopped using Yahoo! as my home page and just switched to the blank default Google search engine. I discovered that it was Yahoo! News and it's AP article selection that was a huge source of my angst since I originally assumed it was fair and balance. You should try switching your homepage away from juanwilliams.com and see if it curbs your angst. Good luck.

Glengoyne 10-24-2010 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 2369805)
But he also said that it's reasonable to be fearful of all Muslims in Muslim garb. That's the very essence of bigotry, whether he wants to admit it or not....


See, and I think it is YOU that is adding the ALL. I think it is reasonable for people to feel uncomfortable while boarding a plane and noting the presence of middle eastern men, whether they are in "garb" or not. Possibly the same for women in the ubiquitous "garb". I haven't felt that way when I have been placed in that position while flying. That said, I don't think it would be an impossibility for me given the right circumstances.

I give JW the benefit of the doubt that he doesn't ALWAYS feel this way about EVERYONE he observed in such dress, also that muslim garb wasn't the only element to his own assessment of his safety while flying. I don't equate the inclusion of racial profiling into this assessment as racism, although giving race too much weight in a flash assessment of an individual is misguided and naive.

I don't think Juan Williams is moving all that far away from his position in that statement you quoted. I just think, from his perspective that he is copping to being a little "lazy", and not a little racist. That was why he couched his comments. He was conscious of the fact that he isn't on the "high ground" here. He was admitting to something that embarrassed him.

SteveMax58 10-24-2010 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glengoyne (Post 2370374)
I don't think Juan Williams is moving all that far away from his position in that statement you quoted. I just think, from his perspective that he is copping to being a little "lazy", and not a little racist. That was why he couched his comments. He was conscious of the fact that he isn't on the "high ground" here. He was admitting to something that embarrassed him.


I think this is the crux of the issue & what saddens me most about dialog in this country any more. It isn't good enough to acknowledge your honest feeling while stating what you know to be the case(or the more noble reaction). Trying to reconcile those 2 things is the very heart (IMHO) of getting past racism/racial issues as a topic in this country (in a good sense).

But rather than embrace his honesty (both emotional & intellectual) he was fired. Whether he was fired as a matter of convenience due to past actions, or fired for this particular issue on its own merits, I think this type of firing does more to add divisive speech to race relations rather than create the atmosphere to better them.

But as it stands...he'll get his own books, his own show, make a lot more money now, and decide that being controversial feeds his family better than being "honest". Sure "honesty" got him to this point...but it doesn't sell very well on most topics which is what Hannity, O'Reilly, Olberman, Maddow, Coulter, Limbaugh, Moore, and many other people have found out.

JPhillips 10-24-2010 01:43 PM

Where does he say this was something that embarrassed him? Instead of coping to a natural, if undesirable feeling he says that we have to deal with the fact that there is a war between the USA and Muslims.

Dutch 10-24-2010 02:03 PM

Quote:


...but it doesn't sell very well on most topics which is what Hannity, O'Reilly, Olberman, Maddow, Coulter, Limbaugh, Moore, and many other people have found out.


Or the AP for that matter. :D

DaddyTorgo 10-24-2010 04:12 PM

Pictures of Muslims Wearing Things

SteveMax58 10-24-2010 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 2370430)
Where does he say this was something that embarrassed him? Instead of coping to a natural, if undesirable feeling he says that we have to deal with the fact that there is a war between the USA and Muslims.


I don't know that he said that, maybe on a different day or show, possibly.

But if you watch the entire segment (not just the trimmed down portion) he is actually lecturing O'Reilly about not making his (i.e. O'Reilly's) blanket statements about muslims without at least qualifying it (or giving scope).

flounder 10-25-2010 06:36 AM

Here's a transcript of the entire segment as well as the segment before.

Spoiler

Glengoyne 10-25-2010 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 2370430)
Where does he say this was something that embarrassed him? Instead of coping to a natural, if undesirable feeling he says that we have to deal with the fact that there is a war between the USA and Muslims.


He starts off by saying "I'm not a racist" or words to that effect. He is on the record with books on the subject of civil rights. To think that he isn't embarrassed by his admission to straying into racial profiling(my words), seems to reflect an effort to define his position on a complex issue using only his words from a two minute sound-byte.

Also, the war between the USA and Muslims was JW quoting the Times Square Bomber, conceding a point to B.O. while going on to disagree with O'Reilly's argument.

RainMaker 10-25-2010 03:03 PM

I still don't see what Juan Williams said that is so bad. Everytime I've heard him make an argument, whether I agree or not, it's well thought out and offers perspective. I thought what he was saying made sense. He was saying that despite his record on civil rights and his disgust toward racism/bigotry, even he feels uncomfortable in settings. That we have gotten so PC that we can't even discuss that.

I don't think he was fired for what he said as much as it was an excuse for NPR to fire someone who appears on hate speech shows. The sad thing is that Williams is so much better than the hacks on that network. Having him appear with a dope like Mary Katharine Ham is embarrasing to the guy.

He'd make a great host of a show but not sure there is a venue for him. Fox doesn't have the audience intelligent enough to understand him and the other networks aren't going to both with him either.

WSR 10-25-2010 10:29 PM

Nice attempt at bipartisanship there Mr. President:

Quote:

We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."

Obama assails GOP on clouded final campaign push - Yahoo! News

DaddyTorgo 10-25-2010 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2371210)
Nice attempt at bipartisanship there Mr. President:



Obama assails GOP on clouded final campaign push - Yahoo! News


Why should he be bipartisan when the Republicans have not only repeatedly demonstrated that they won't be bipartisan, but have also come out and explicitly ruled out being bipartisan??

WSR 10-25-2010 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo (Post 2371254)
Why should he be bipartisan when the Republicans have not only repeatedly demonstrated that they won't be bipartisan, but have also come out and explicitly ruled out being bipartisan??


As I see it, they are not willing to work in a bipartisan manner on his Socialist initiatives and spending our great grandchildren into debt. I know how this sounds, but I am one of the Independents that have been disillusioned by his rhetoric and empty promises.

RainMaker 10-26-2010 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2371273)
As I see it, they are not willing to work in a bipartisan manner on his Socialist initiatives and spending our great grandchildren into debt. I know how this sounds, but I am one of the Independents that have been disillusioned by his rhetoric and empty promises.

Learn what Socialism is before using the word.

DaddyTorgo 10-26-2010 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2371273)
As I see it, they are not willing to work in a bipartisan manner on his Socialist initiatives and spending our great grandchildren into debt. I know how this sounds, but I am one of the Independents that have been disillusioned by his rhetoric and empty promises.


Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 2371279)
Learn what Socialism is before using the word.


Seriously. The rhetoric you're using there marks you as one of those "independents" who isn't really independent at all.

Did you know for instance that the federal budget actually shrank by 9% this year?? (I believe this fact is correct, I only heard a snippet of it while I was working out, so don't jump down my throat if I got some piece of it wrong).

Sure we're still running massive deficits, but that's hardly the fault of Obama exclusively. The last president to present a balanced budget was a democrat, before Bush blew it out of the water with his massive deficit spending on foreign wars and tax cuts for large corporations and the top percentiles of earners.

Greyroofoo 10-26-2010 03:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo (Post 2371287)
Did you know for instance that the federal budget actually shrank by 9% this year?? (I believe this fact is correct, I only heard a snippet of it while I was working out, so don't jump down my throat if I got some piece of it wrong).


I would love to know what numbers you're using.

flounder 10-26-2010 05:55 AM

I think he's referring to the fact that the 2009 budget deficit was $1.4 trillion which was $162 billion below White House projections. However, that $1.4 trillion was $962 billion above 2008's deficit. Source here.

Edit: Whoops. I didn't realize there were 2010 numbers out. He's right. The budget deficit did decrease to $1.3 trillion in fiscal year 2010 according to this article.

Greyroofoo 10-26-2010 06:11 AM

Yeah that sounds about right, I thought he was referring to the total federal government expenditure, which has increased.

JPhillips 10-26-2010 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2371210)
Nice attempt at bipartisanship there Mr. President:


"The most you can expect is two years of good old-fashioned gridlock," Rob Bishop (R-Utah)

"The last Republican Congress didn't suffer from too little compromise, it suffered from too much." Mike Pence (R-Indiana)

"I don't care who, what, when or where, I'm not compromising." Ken Buck (R-Colorado)

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky)

And that's just this week.

Neon_Chaos 10-26-2010 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 2371279)
Learn what Socialism is before using the word.


+1

lungs 10-26-2010 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 2371279)
Learn what Socialism is before using the word.


The correct world he should've used was Islamomarxism.

Passacaglia 10-26-2010 07:32 AM

Islamo Marx? I must have missed the movies with him in it. Did he replace Chico?

DaddyTorgo 10-26-2010 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flounder (Post 2371320)
I think he's referring to the fact that the 2009 budget deficit was $1.4 trillion which was $162 billion below White House projections. However, that $1.4 trillion was $962 billion above 2008's deficit. Source here.

Edit: Whoops. I didn't realize there were 2010 numbers out. He's right. The budget deficit did decrease to $1.3 trillion in fiscal year 2010 according to this article.


Thanks for finding the source flounder. It was just a soundbyte I heard while getting dressed in the locker room at the gym or something.

cartman 10-26-2010 10:05 AM

Whoops. This is kinda of a big screw-up in the message. In the CA governor's race, Meg Whitman ran an ad declaring "30 years ago, anything was possible in this state". Sounds good, right? One problem with that. The governor 30 years ago was her current opponent, Jerry Brown.

Ad reminds Whitman who was governor 30 years ago – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

DaddyTorgo 10-26-2010 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cartman (Post 2371396)
Whoops. This is kinda of a big screw-up in the message. In the CA governor's race, Meg Whitman ran an ad declaring "30 years ago, anything was possible in this state". Sounds good, right? One problem with that. The governor 30 years ago was her current opponent, Jerry Brown.

Ad reminds Whitman who was governor 30 years ago – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs


Whitman's an idiot.

JediKooter 10-26-2010 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Passacaglia (Post 2371339)
Islamo Marx? I must have missed the movies with him in it. Did he replace Chico?


Yes, and he played a mean trombone.

JediKooter 10-26-2010 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo (Post 2371406)
Whitman's an idiot.


Just be glad you don't have to listen or watch all of her dumb ass ads. She trys to equate what she did at ebay to running the state of California.

DaddyTorgo 10-26-2010 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JediKooter (Post 2371426)
Just be glad you don't have to listen or watch all of her dumb ass ads. She trys to equate what she did at ebay to running the state of California.


Oh I'm glad :D

molson 10-26-2010 11:26 AM

I'm disappointed that it's looking more and more like prop 19 won't pass in California. So we won't have the Obama administration stepping up federal criminal enforcement of state-legal California marijuana. The public response to which would have been very interesting.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:56 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.