Championship Drive Show

[Doppelganger]

What honesty are you taking about?

That liberals err towards inclusion and conservatives err towards exclusion.

 

[Doppelganger]

You don’t want to have a discussion, you want to hit people over the head with what you think are your morally superior opinions.

If a discussion is not being had it's because, again, the people who oppose me are weak at argument.

 

[Doppelganger]

What two “sides” are you even talking about?

The Curt Schilling vs. Jemele Hill example.

You'd know this if you actually read any of the posts in this thread.

 

[Doppelganger]

Lmao @ people making themselves the spokesperson on why people do or don't like ESPiN.....

Political correctness has infected every aspect of society because of the left since the 1960s wanting to make everything political, to force their worldview onto everyone..

To then get butthurt over the inevitable backlash by calling everyone racist is typical overreaction by the useful idiots on the left side of the spectrum....

See what I mean?

Conservative guy who literally makes everything in life about politics. Even his sports viewing experience.

Whether someone puts cinnamon or jam on their toast? Political correctness run amok!

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

[MENTION=17368]Doppelganger[/MENTION], you just want to engage in political stereotyping.

You’re talking about sides, I’m talking about you marginalizing an entire political movement, conservatism, as vile. Which you clearly did.

It’s clear to me you don’t understand the actual principles of conservatism, liberalism, libertarians, etc, and all the variants, and would rather shout about your particular viewpoint and marginalize any other viewpoint, rather than engage in thoughtful discussion.

Stupid me. For a second, I thought a thoughtful discussion would ensue. But it’s a big mistake on my part.

This thread needs to die a merciful death.

If I were a mod, I’d lock this motherfūcker post haste.

 

[RichtsaCane]

There was a time in history that men did men things and women did women things. The
Lord talks above these times in Romans 1. 'Who exchanged the truth of God for the lie..professing to be wise, they became fools...

 

[Doppelganger]

You’re talking about sides, I’m talking about you marginalizing an entire political movement, conservatism, as vile. Which you clearly did.

And I told you what sides meant in this context because you're apparently too lazy to read.

 

[GenericYesMan]

I agree that it has nothing to do with the military, but the fact the protests occurs at that time and place, allows the issue to become clouded.

Only to people with an agenda to push.

Or people who lost a loved one overseas, and would prefer that they engaged in their protest at another time/place.

Remember that time when the Vice President of the United States, using a boat load of taxpayer money, flew from Nevada to Indianapolis, had the Secret Service use their time (and your taxpayer dollars) to sterilize an entire football stadium, engaged in a petty political stunt during the national anthem and then immediately flew to California afterwards (on your taxpayer dime of course)?

The whole MUH ANTHEM STICK 2 SPORTZ shtick got thrown right out the window right about there.

 

[Doppelganger]

It’s clear to me you don’t understand the actual principles of conservatism, liberalism, libertarians, etc, and all the variants, and would rather shout about your particular viewpoint and marginalize any other viewpoint, rather than engage in thoughtful discussion.

See, a discussion is supposed to have a point and a counterpoint.

I said that conservative opinions tend to be exclusive while liberal ones tend to be inclusive.

Now you can disagree but in order to do that you have to offer a counterpoint.

You can't just whine. That's not sufficient.

 

[Doppelganger]

Stupid me. For a second, I thought a thoughtful discussion would ensue. But it’s a big mistake on my part.

The mistake is that you never posted anything thoughtful.

 

[Gatorhater]

Maybe it is what they are protesting? If they came out and protested that the rules of play in the NBA are racist because they discriminate against against non-slavic white people, maybe it would be better received. How about the rules in NFL. The No Name defense from the Dolphin Perfect Season held the record for lowest points score against for 30 plus years until Ray's Ravens finally broke it. 10 of the starters were white guys. Rules were changes a couple years later to allow WR to run freer down the field(canes were not the first Miami team to have Miami Rules created). This put a complete premium speed on both sides of the ball. Very few white skill players since. Rules matter. That was a mantra of the Civil Rights movement when blacks were underrepresented in various fields. It was true then and it is true now. If you are going to protest unfairness, it helps your cause to be fair in your selections.

Also, this just reeks of scrambling to rationalize something that has an obvious answer.

White America just doesn't like blacks protesting things.

And Fox is the outlet for this kind of uneasiness.

So you are saying that situations where virtually all the persons in a particular filed of endeavor are all one race is only discrimination and racists if the people in question are white? Can blacks be racist? Can whites be discriminated against? Or, in your personal does it even matter if they are?

When you make a blank statement based on personal opinion, the person whose opinion it is matters. What is inside you? Are you someone's evil twin as your chosen name implies?

For me, I am inclined to dislike protest for some reason. Maybe it was growing up in the 60's when everything being protested today was being protested then, plus some. Back then most of the protesters were whites not blacks, but a large portion of the country still didn't like it. Or maybe it is my DNA. My paternal ancestors were here and participated in American Revolution and the Civil War(both sides in both). Maybe I'm just predisposed to do less yelling and complaining and more lets just get down to it and start the shooting. Clearly that might not be the best on inclinations.

Heck, on the whole flag thing I am conflicted -- having family die for it and a larger number die fighting against it and having their homes and possessions burned and stolen under it. Not to mention being murder in the name of it. You seem to have a clearer singleness of idea. I've been called closed minded for being like that. Have you ever been called closed minded? You clearly see things only in terms of black and white.

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

Stupid me. For a second, I thought a thoughtful discussion would ensue. But it’s a big mistake on my part.

The mistake is that you never posted anything thoughtful.

No meaningful discussion can occur when someone stakes out a position that dehumanizes an entire political ideology as vile.

The mistake was that you never posted anything thoughtful, it’s all agenda waving in people’s faces.

But guess what, this isn’t the forum, and clearly you’re not interested in hearing an intelligent counterpoint, because there can be none when you’ve already classified an entire group as “vile”

You were wrong on viewership and now you just want to shove your self-perceived morally superior opinion in people’s faces.

No thanks, I’m tapping out.

Stick to sports.

 

[Tad Footeball]

[MENTION=17368]Doppelganger[/MENTION], you just want to engage in political stereotyping.

You’re talking about sides, I’m talking about you marginalizing an entire political movement, conservatism, as vile. Which you clearly did.

It’s clear to me you don’t understand the actual principles of conservatism, liberalism, libertarians, etc, and all the variants, and would rather shout about your particular viewpoint and marginalize any other viewpoint, rather than engage in thoughtful discussion.

Stupid me. For a second, I thought a thoughtful discussion would ensue. But it’s a big mistake on my part.

This thread needs to die a merciful death.

If I were a mod, I’d lock this motherfūcker post haste.

Shoulda locked it when I called him an insufferable douche. I gladly would've taken the infractions. Me and all "my boys" (the mods) could've laughed about it later.

 

[thisismyusername]

Netflix just announced that they added 5.3 million more subscribers in Q3 of this year. Obviously, not everyone that has Netflix is a cord cutter, but this is still indicative of where viewers are going. Yes viewership is down on ESPN, but that is also tied to the drop in subscribers from people no longer paying for cable. Also those of you that say ESPN should stick to highlights/sports etc. Why would I watch hours of SportsCenter with ads for highlights, when I can watch them on YouTube? ESPN has to adapt to changing markets so they've experimented and tried out different shows. As much as people like to hate on debate tv, First Take is one of their highest rated shows. Le Batard is a prime example of them going with something different/weird compared to the seriousness of old ESPN, and is doing well. People love Highly Questionable and Papi. The ^ is also an example of ESPN trying something different, where yes, they've given voice to minorities. ESPN is now expanding into the podcast market with more original programming there as well. Finally, you can't say people are dropping ESPN because they don't like their leftist views because you can't just drop one channel. That's why viewership is down from ESPN to Fox News to CNN and even to Nickelodean and Disney.

 

[NorthEastCane]

Depends on what you would classify as a "conservative" view or policy.

Less immigrants. Exclusive. --- Rule of Law - follow the legal process Don't even attempt to claim exclusivity. My wife is an immigrant and she gets even more irate that she and her family had to wait an follow a legal process while others are given preferential treatment (sounds exclusive to me)

You can't use that restroom! Exclusive. --- Biology - if your still physically a man (or female for that matter), it's hardly exclusive to use facilities set up for them. There's no one denying access to a restroom.

No, we can't subsidize some healthcare polices! Exclusive. --- Fiduciary Responsibility - Congress presumably has a fiscal reasonability to enact legislation that is financially sustainable. With regards to health care we're still waiting. My son was forced onto an Obamacare plan and lost access to his doctors is forced to see providers that "ration" their time. It's becoming apparent that those who continue to retain quality healthcare are exclusive to those with company subsidized plans or those who can afford to pay cash for services.

These are not even points that conservatives will argue. They agree. --- They may not disagree on the points but they definitely disagree on the reasons why. They view the proposed solutions as extreme, loaded with unintended consequences, with a remote at best chance of achieving it's objective. only .

You seem to be a binary sort of person - the choice is my way or the wrong way. It's not a binary world out there. There are multiple approaches to everything. You need to stop letting your biases keep you from seeing them.

 

[Hurricanemike32]

So Jemele Hill isn't an anchor on Sportscenter? That would be news to her and her employers.

Her entire career at ESPN was as an opinion person.

ESPN tried something different on Sportscenter and it's failing.

Every fact seems to be news to you.

Again you don't seem to want to deal with the facts of the discussion. Follow along I will go slowly for you so can follow along...

Linda Cohn was an anchor at ESPN when she made her comments. Fact

Jemele Hill was an anchor at ESPN when she made her comments. Fact

Linda Cohn was suspended for months for the comments that she made. Fact

Jemele Hill was NOT suspended at all for the comments that she made. Fact

Whether or not Jemele Hill used to be an opinion person on the network in the past has no bearing on this discussion because she is NOW an anchor and was at the time of her comments. Apparently ESPN has a separate set of rules for their opinion people than they do for their anchors. The day that Jemele Hill was made an anchor than the rules for her changed....or at least they should have. What would your viewpoint have been had the roles been reversed and Jemele Hill was suspended for her comments? I am guessing that you wouldn't have dismissed them the way you are now for Cohn. That is, at its core, hypocrisy.

You can try to twist the facts any way that you want but it still doesn't change what they are which is indeed fact. It seems odd to me that you being the social superhero that you seem to want to be that you wouldn't be arguing on the side of Cohn in this discussion since she is the one who got the short end of the stick. Maybe it has something to do with the color of her skin.

Again you can always tell when someone's argument starts to crumble. They resort to insults and name calling rather than falling back on the basis of their argument. Liberalism at it's best.

Feel free to comment with the same baseless arguments and snide comments in response to this. You can go on continuing to feel like you have won the debate and I will go on knowing that I did. When you deal in facts it is easy to do just that.

Just out of curiosity, are you a Miami fan?

 

[jdmorgan76]

Lmao @ people making themselves the spokesperson on why people do or don't like ESPiN.....

Political correctness has infected every aspect of society because of the left since the 1960s wanting to make everything political, to force their worldview onto everyone..

To then get butthurt over the inevitable backlash by calling everyone racist is typical overreaction by the useful idiots on the left side of the spectrum....

See what I mean?

Conservative guy who literally makes everything in life about politics. Even his sports viewing experience.

Whether someone puts cinnamon or jam on their toast? Political correctness run amok!

Except I am not a conservative, but in your rush to appear high and mighty it fits your stereotypical worleview. I am also capable of understanding political correctness run amok, which you are apparently unable to do, or you agree with the agenda...

If I turn on ESPiN and I am constantly being talked down to by their know nothing hosts, male or female about what a terrible society we have and how big govt liberalism is gonna fix everything I am not the one making it political...

But carry on with your arrogance...

 

[407cane]

Shes a great example of why espn is loaing viewers. Shes an idiot but espn has to meet their social justice quotas

Has there ever been a woman in sports media that you and others haven't despised?

Maybe it says something about you and not them.

Sarah Spain, Linda Cohn, Suzy Kolber are all good. Lady who calls Yankees games is also good. On the AV Club, there is some gal who covers the WWE and she is hilarious. Dinich and Adelson demonstrate they know jack sh#t about football every time they write an article or appear on TV. Also pretty sure Miami barely got a mention but they spent 20min on Auburn and Michigan.

SEC bias sucked when the conference was actually good

it's even worse when the conference sucks. only good teams are georgia and alabama

they spent half the **** show talking about auburn... WHY!?

auburns wins are as follows:

mississippi state, mercer, georgia southern, ole miss, mizzou

so pretty much a high school team. they hold clemson to reasonable margin and get heralded all world and now SECPN is all over the

 

[thisismyusername]

So Jemele Hill isn't an anchor on Sportscenter? That would be news to her and her employers.

Her entire career at ESPN was as an opinion person.

ESPN tried something different on Sportscenter and it's failing.

Every fact seems to be news to you.

Again you don't seem to want to deal with the facts of the discussion. Follow along I will go slowly for you so can follow along...

Linda Cohn was an anchor at ESPN when she made her comments. Fact

Jemele Hill was an anchor at ESPN when she made her comments. Fact

Linda Cohn was suspended for months for the comments that she made. Fact

Jemele Hill was NOT suspended at all for the comments that she made. Fact

Whether or not Jemele Hill used to be an opinion person on the network in the past has no bearing on this discussion because she is NOW an anchor and was at the time of her comments. Apparently ESPN has a separate set of rules for their opinion people than they do for their anchors. The day that Jemele Hill was made an anchor than the rules for her changed....or at least they should have. What would your viewpoint have been had the roles been reversed and Jemele Hill was suspended for her comments? I am guessing that you wouldn't have dismissed them the way you are now for Cohn. That is, at its core, hypocrisy.

You can try to twist the facts any way that you want but it still doesn't change what they are which is indeed fact. It seems odd to me that you being the social superhero that you seem to want to be that you wouldn't be arguing on the side of Cohn in this discussion since she is the one who got the short end of the stick. Maybe it has something to do with the color of her skin.

Again you can always tell when someone's argument starts to crumble. They resort to insults and name calling rather than falling back on the basis of their argument. Liberalism at it's best.

Feel free to comment with the same baseless arguments and snide comments in response to this. You can go on continuing to feel like you have won the debate and I will go on knowing that I did. When you deal in facts it is easy to do just that.

Just out of curiosity, are you a Miami fan?

Jemele was suspended

 

[CaneFan79]

Many black members of the armed forces, who fought and died for our country, disagreed with the protests as well, so does that make them white supremacists, too, because they were frustrated?

Turning the issue into one about the military was complete and utter subject-changing meant to rile up Trump's most ardent supporters.

Kneeling during the anthem has absolutely nothing to do with the military. Men in white wigs did as much for our freedom as any current member of the armed forces. Did the protests disrespect 18th century politicians, too?

You stepped in it here.

Scenario: I am a professor at a large university and I decide to to do a special lecture on a research effort I recently completed, one I feel will have currency in today's climate and may even tweak the president. My lecture is titled: "The Benefits of Non-Indegenous People Coming to the US in the 18th and 19th Centuries." My intent is to show anti-immigration activists just how ignorant their positions are and my lecture, which focuses on European and Middle-Eastern migrants coming to the US and growing it's standard of living, is mostly well received...That is until the black student union rightly shows indignation at a group of "non-indigenous" who certainly grew the economy, but were taken by force. They demand the university sanction me, as they have been offended by my lack of sensitivity to the plight of their ancestors. The University censures me and I do not stage the lecture again.

Remember, my INTENT was to promote the benefits of people coming to the United States from the rest of the world, a noble cause some would say; however, no matter my INTENT, I succeeded in offending people who had a different interpretation of what I was talking about.

As a veteran, I can tell you it's the same situation...No matter the players INTENT, it IS perceived as offensive.