OT: First Openly Recruit (Arizona)

why is this news?


It's tweet bait. The media puts it out hoping some "un-enlightened" sports celeb, politician (especially if aligned in some remote way with Trump), celebrity in general, etc. puts 140 characters out than can be "crafted" into bashing ****. Now the person responding may be using it for their own devices (a representative from a conservative district strengthening their anti-homosexual bona fides, for example) but most things in put out by the media are not straight (no pun intended) reported, especially social issues; there is a narrative and an expected response baked in.

sure..all that..or in this case,,it is actually news.

How so?
Because he likes to fck folks in the *** and give bjs?

You sound like an angry closeter. You claim this isn't news and that you don't care, but you seem angry about it and already have 2-3 posts in this thread...???
 
Advertisement
why is this news?


It's tweet bait. The media puts it out hoping some "un-enlightened" sports celeb, politician (especially if aligned in some remote way with Trump), celebrity in general, etc. puts 140 characters out than can be "crafted" into bashing ****. Now the person responding may be using it for their own devices (a representative from a conservative district strengthening their anti-homosexual bona fides, for example) but most things in put out by the media are not straight (no pun intended) reported, especially social issues; there is a narrative and an expected response baked in.

sure..all that..or in this case,,it is actually news.

How so?
Because he likes to fck folks in the *** and give bjs?

You sound like an angry closeter. You claim this isn't news and that you don't care, but you seem angry about it and already have 2-3 posts in this thread...???

And you sound like an angry Social Justice Warrior.
I'm not necessarily angry, but I find it amusing when people who want to be treated like everyone else (a reasonable expectation, btw) have to go out of their way to announce who they like to get down with.
How about just doing your thing and get on with life?
I don't need to know who you fck, regardless if you're ghay or hetero.
I watch football games to see blocking, tackling and TDs - not be subjected to ESPN-crafted tales of
someone's sexuality.
Anyways, take your drama out of my face, snowflake.
 
Last edited:
why is this news?


It's tweet bait. The media puts it out hoping some "un-enlightened" sports celeb, politician (especially if aligned in some remote way with Trump), celebrity in general, etc. puts 140 characters out than can be "crafted" into bashing ****. Now the person responding may be using it for their own devices (a representative from a conservative district strengthening their anti-homosexual bona fides, for example) but most things in put out by the media are not straight (no pun intended) reported, especially social issues; there is a narrative and an expected response baked in.

sure..all that..or in this case,,it is actually news.

I didn't say it was "Fake News;" My point is that an institution following the law, in this case Title IX, does not rise to the level of needing a story, it is only "reported" because of a particular motivation.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf

Page 5 clearly shows that discrimination in educational opportunities is unlawful and the institutions were reminded of the fact.

This story's purpose was to create a desired response, one which would allow further bashing of people who CAN'T overturn a FEDERAL Statute even if they wanted to do so.

Maybe you shouldn't have slept through 9th grade Civics...
 
Sounds like it is major news to the OP...........not that there is anything wrong with that.....
 
Advertisement
why is this news?


It's tweet bait. The media puts it out hoping some "un-enlightened" sports celeb, politician (especially if aligned in some remote way with Trump), celebrity in general, etc. puts 140 characters out than can be "crafted" into bashing ****. Now the person responding may be using it for their own devices (a representative from a conservative district strengthening their anti-homosexual bona fides, for example) but most things in put out by the media are not straight (no pun intended) reported, especially social issues; there is a narrative and an expected response baked in.

sure..all that..or in this case,,it is actually news.

I didn't say it was "Fake News;" My point is that an institution following the law, in this case Title IX, does not rise to the level of needing a story, it is only "reported" because of a particular motivation.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf

Page 5 clearly shows that discrimination in educational opportunities is unlawful and the institutions were reminded of the fact.

This story's purpose was to create a desired response, one which would allow further bashing of people who CAN'T overturn a FEDERAL Statute even if they wanted to do so.

Maybe you shouldn't have slept through 9th grade Civics...

You may be right about the purpose of this particular story, but come off it. The purpose of all stories is not to push an agenda.

For example, despite the enlightened responses on this board, this is still a big deal to some people. Some people still feel they can't openly be themselves and may find value in stories like this. Some people may feel that their values are being threatened by situations like this and may want to stay informed about them.

You're view of "the media" is nice if you've set out to make it ok to just ignore what you don't like, but the truth is that stories get written for all kinds of reasons. Go ahead and write it all off as calculated to support an agenda, but I think you're making a mistake.
 
If the kid wants to be reallllll original then this will be the last time he uses it at any sort of platform. Michael Sam claimed he was going to do that too.....until he didn't.....and blamed his failures as a pro on it. And this works both ways. I found Teblows constant use of whatever "Christian" based image he was wrapped in to be off-putting and borderline fraudulent. We've somehow reached a point where the media is soooo thirsty for athletes to take stances that they'll ignore the actual on-field performance (or lack thereof) and will continue to prop you up if you're outspoken- expecially about issues they're sympathetic toward or that'll create content for them.
 
Sam just plain sucked (no pun intended) as a pro. Couldn't even stick in Canada. Did he really blame homophobia for not making it in the league. There's at least a couple of NFL defenders now where it's pretty much known they're rump rangers and nobody really gives a shīt.
 
why is this news?


It's tweet bait. The media puts it out hoping some "un-enlightened" sports celeb, politician (especially if aligned in some remote way with Trump), celebrity in general, etc. puts 140 characters out than can be "crafted" into bashing ****. Now the person responding may be using it for their own devices (a representative from a conservative district strengthening their anti-homosexual bona fides, for example) but most things in put out by the media are not straight (no pun intended) reported, especially social issues; there is a narrative and an expected response baked in.

sure..all that..or in this case,,it is actually news.

I didn't say it was "Fake News;" My point is that an institution following the law, in this case Title IX, does not rise to the level of needing a story, it is only "reported" because of a particular motivation.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf

Page 5 clearly shows that discrimination in educational opportunities is unlawful and the institutions were reminded of the fact.

This story's purpose was to create a desired response, one which would allow further bashing of people who CAN'T overturn a FEDERAL Statute even if they wanted to do so.

Maybe you shouldn't have slept through 9th grade Civics...

You may be right about the purpose of this particular story, but come off it. The purpose of all stories is not to push an agenda.

For example, despite the enlightened responses on this board, this is still a big deal to some people. Some people still feel they can't openly be themselves and may find value in stories like this. Some people may feel that their values are being threatened by situations like this and may want to stay informed about them.

You're view of "the media" is nice if you've set out to make it ok to just ignore what you don't like, but the truth is that stories get written for all kinds of reasons. Go ahead and write it all off as calculated to support an agenda, but I think you're making a mistake.

No mistake at all...You ever dealt with the "intrepid journalists" of the media? From Eldorado Canyon, the mission that bombed Libya (and where we lost 2 aircrew) in 1986 to 11 years in SOF to Iraq, I ran into a lot of media types. To the man and women, they all had in their mind (or their editor's mind and they were dutifully following orders) what story they were going to write BEFORE they wrote it and didn't care if they wrote something that put the US military further in harm's way; they had a narrative they were following and everything else be damned...When Bush pulled off that Air Force One flight to Baghdad on Thanksgiving 2003, they were seething that he fooled them and they didn't get to break the story before he arrived (oblivous that insurgent MANPADS (portable SAMs) had already downed one aircraft and "reporting" mission details early would have put everyone on the aircraft in danger).

Let's not forget Dan Rather's little forged Bush ANG memo...Of course, a brilliant mind like his couldn't figure out that in 1972, you typed in either Pica or Elite, not MS Word Times New Roman!

I value the truth, not something that is designed to rile up snowflakes that would be baffled by this:

[video=youtube;tyeJ55o3El0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0[/video]
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
No big deal. There's already been a ghey Heisman trophy winner.

View attachment 43134

View attachment 43135

View attachment 43136

Is it me, but why do ghayturd have that ghay aura about them?
They dress ghay, alot of them speak in the lispy effeminate manner, have fanboy hairstyles,etc.
You can almost tell with certain recruits who is going to catch the ghay and sign with that
school in ghaynesville.
Not just with football players either. You see it with the basketball players and even with some
public figures like Marco Rubio, sports pundit Israel Guiterrez, etc.

It's in their name GayTurds
 
Sam just plain sucked (no pun intended) as a pro. Couldn't even stick in Canada. Did he really blame homophobia for not making it in the league. There's at least a couple of NFL defenders now where it's pretty much known they're rump rangers and nobody really gives a shīt.

“I think if I never would have came out, never would have said those words out to the public, I would still be currently in the NFL. But because of me saying those words, I think it could have played a huge part in my current situation,”

“I know how to play this game, I can play this game,” Sam said. “I don’t know what goes on in the NFL with the guys who are making the decisions, but whatever it is, hopefully it’s not what I think it is.”

https://thinkprogress.org/michael-s...teams-not-signing-him-4cf478530e5f#.1d2u1shi5

The problem here is also the complete media hack fraud that is Dave Zirin too. He knows that little stat about "only $EC Defensive Player of the Year not on a pro roster" is complete horse$hit too but he floats it with a straight (no pun intended) face because his real goal here isn't sports journalism but social justice advocacy. If they'd just be honest about that then it'd almost be respectable.
 
Advertisement
It's tweet bait. The media puts it out hoping some "un-enlightened" sports celeb, politician (especially if aligned in some remote way with Trump), celebrity in general, etc. puts 140 characters out than can be "crafted" into bashing ****. Now the person responding may be using it for their own devices (a representative from a conservative district strengthening their anti-homosexual bona fides, for example) but most things in put out by the media are not straight (no pun intended) reported, especially social issues; there is a narrative and an expected response baked in.

sure..all that..or in this case,,it is actually news.

I didn't say it was "Fake News;" My point is that an institution following the law, in this case Title IX, does not rise to the level of needing a story, it is only "reported" because of a particular motivation.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf

Page 5 clearly shows that discrimination in educational opportunities is unlawful and the institutions were reminded of the fact.

This story's purpose was to create a desired response, one which would allow further bashing of people who CAN'T overturn a FEDERAL Statute even if they wanted to do so.

Maybe you shouldn't have slept through 9th grade Civics...

You may be right about the purpose of this particular story, but come off it. The purpose of all stories is not to push an agenda.

For example, despite the enlightened responses on this board, this is still a big deal to some people. Some people still feel they can't openly be themselves and may find value in stories like this. Some people may feel that their values are being threatened by situations like this and may want to stay informed about them.

You're view of "the media" is nice if you've set out to make it ok to just ignore what you don't like, but the truth is that stories get written for all kinds of reasons. Go ahead and write it all off as calculated to support an agenda, but I think you're making a mistake.

No mistake at all...You ever dealt with the "intrepid journalists" of the media? From Eldorado Canyon, the mission that bombed Libya (and where we lost 2 aircrew) in 1986 to 11 years in SOF to Iraq, I ran into a lot of media types. To the man and women, they all had in their mind (or their editor's mind and they were dutifully following orders) what story they were going to write BEFORE they wrote it and didn't care if they wrote something that put the US military further in harm's way; they had a narrative they were following and everything else be damned...When Bush pulled off that Air Force One flight to Baghdad on Thanksgiving 2003, they were seething that he fooled them and they didn't get to break the story before he arrived (oblivous that insurgent MANPADS (portable SAMs) had already downed one aircraft and "reporting" mission details early would have put everyone on the aircraft in danger).

Let's not forget Dan Rather's little forged Bush ANG memo...Of course, a brilliant mind like his couldn't figure out that in 1972, you typed in either Pica or Elite, not MS Word Times New Roman!

I value the truth, not something that is designed to rile up snowflakes that would be baffled by this:

[video=youtube;tyeJ55o3El0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0[/video]


So it appears what you are trying to say is that based on your limited experiences with the press as well as some anecdotal incidents, your conclusion is generally to not trust the press.. Why do i have a feeling if someone had a negative viewpoint of, say, the US armed services, based on limited experiences and anecdotal evidence, you would have a major problem with that? The broad brushes you paint your argument with can be dangerous.
 
It's tweet bait. The media puts it out hoping some "un-enlightened" sports celeb, politician (especially if aligned in some remote way with Trump), celebrity in general, etc. puts 140 characters out than can be "crafted" into bashing ****. Now the person responding may be using it for their own devices (a representative from a conservative district strengthening their anti-homosexual bona fides, for example) but most things in put out by the media are not straight (no pun intended) reported, especially social issues; there is a narrative and an expected response baked in.

sure..all that..or in this case,,it is actually news.

I didn't say it was "Fake News;" My point is that an institution following the law, in this case Title IX, does not rise to the level of needing a story, it is only "reported" because of a particular motivation.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf

Page 5 clearly shows that discrimination in educational opportunities is unlawful and the institutions were reminded of the fact.

This story's purpose was to create a desired response, one which would allow further bashing of people who CAN'T overturn a FEDERAL Statute even if they wanted to do so.

Maybe you shouldn't have slept through 9th grade Civics...

You may be right about the purpose of this particular story, but come off it. The purpose of all stories is not to push an agenda.

For example, despite the enlightened responses on this board, this is still a big deal to some people. Some people still feel they can't openly be themselves and may find value in stories like this. Some people may feel that their values are being threatened by situations like this and may want to stay informed about them.

You're view of "the media" is nice if you've set out to make it ok to just ignore what you don't like, but the truth is that stories get written for all kinds of reasons. Go ahead and write it all off as calculated to support an agenda, but I think you're making a mistake.

No mistake at all...You ever dealt with the "intrepid journalists" of the media? From Eldorado Canyon, the mission that bombed Libya (and where we lost 2 aircrew) in 1986 to 11 years in SOF to Iraq, I ran into a lot of media types. To the man and women, they all had in their mind (or their editor's mind and they were dutifully following orders) what story they were going to write BEFORE they wrote it and didn't care if they wrote something that put the US military further in harm's way; they had a narrative they were following and everything else be damned...When Bush pulled off that Air Force One flight to Baghdad on Thanksgiving 2003, they were seething that he fooled them and they didn't get to break the story before he arrived (oblivous that insurgent MANPADS (portable SAMs) had already downed one aircraft and "reporting" mission details early would have put everyone on the aircraft in danger).

Let's not forget Dan Rather's little forged Bush ANG memo...Of course, a brilliant mind like his couldn't figure out that in 1972, you typed in either Pica or Elite, not MS Word Times New Roman!

I value the truth, not something that is designed to rile up snowflakes that would be baffled by this:

[video=youtube;tyeJ55o3El0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0[/video]

Our opinions differ, but I appreciate the serious response as opposed to just calling me a cvnt.

Cheers.
 
Advertisement
sure..all that..or in this case,,it is actually news.

I didn't say it was "Fake News;" My point is that an institution following the law, in this case Title IX, does not rise to the level of needing a story, it is only "reported" because of a particular motivation.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf

Page 5 clearly shows that discrimination in educational opportunities is unlawful and the institutions were reminded of the fact.

This story's purpose was to create a desired response, one which would allow further bashing of people who CAN'T overturn a FEDERAL Statute even if they wanted to do so.

Maybe you shouldn't have slept through 9th grade Civics...

You may be right about the purpose of this particular story, but come off it. The purpose of all stories is not to push an agenda.

For example, despite the enlightened responses on this board, this is still a big deal to some people. Some people still feel they can't openly be themselves and may find value in stories like this. Some people may feel that their values are being threatened by situations like this and may want to stay informed about them.

You're view of "the media" is nice if you've set out to make it ok to just ignore what you don't like, but the truth is that stories get written for all kinds of reasons. Go ahead and write it all off as calculated to support an agenda, but I think you're making a mistake.

No mistake at all...You ever dealt with the "intrepid journalists" of the media? From Eldorado Canyon, the mission that bombed Libya (and where we lost 2 aircrew) in 1986 to 11 years in SOF to Iraq, I ran into a lot of media types. To the man and women, they all had in their mind (or their editor's mind and they were dutifully following orders) what story they were going to write BEFORE they wrote it and didn't care if they wrote something that put the US military further in harm's way; they had a narrative they were following and everything else be damned...When Bush pulled off that Air Force One flight to Baghdad on Thanksgiving 2003, they were seething that he fooled them and they didn't get to break the story before he arrived (oblivous that insurgent MANPADS (portable SAMs) had already downed one aircraft and "reporting" mission details early would have put everyone on the aircraft in danger).

Let's not forget Dan Rather's little forged Bush ANG memo...Of course, a brilliant mind like his couldn't figure out that in 1972, you typed in either Pica or Elite, not MS Word Times New Roman!

I value the truth, not something that is designed to rile up snowflakes that would be baffled by this:

[video=youtube;tyeJ55o3El0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0[/video]

Our opinions differ, but I appreciate the serious response as opposed to just calling me a cvnt.

Cheers.

Cheers to you too, thanks for the lively discussion.
 
Anyone else tried to google him thinking "My-King" wasn't part of his name?

anyways his first name is a dead give away.. He looking for someone to call my king.
 
sure..all that..or in this case,,it is actually news.

I didn't say it was "Fake News;" My point is that an institution following the law, in this case Title IX, does not rise to the level of needing a story, it is only "reported" because of a particular motivation.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf

Page 5 clearly shows that discrimination in educational opportunities is unlawful and the institutions were reminded of the fact.

This story's purpose was to create a desired response, one which would allow further bashing of people who CAN'T overturn a FEDERAL Statute even if they wanted to do so.

Maybe you shouldn't have slept through 9th grade Civics...

You may be right about the purpose of this particular story, but come off it. The purpose of all stories is not to push an agenda.

For example, despite the enlightened responses on this board, this is still a big deal to some people. Some people still feel they can't openly be themselves and may find value in stories like this. Some people may feel that their values are being threatened by situations like this and may want to stay informed about them.

You're view of "the media" is nice if you've set out to make it ok to just ignore what you don't like, but the truth is that stories get written for all kinds of reasons. Go ahead and write it all off as calculated to support an agenda, but I think you're making a mistake.

No mistake at all...You ever dealt with the "intrepid journalists" of the media? From Eldorado Canyon, the mission that bombed Libya (and where we lost 2 aircrew) in 1986 to 11 years in SOF to Iraq, I ran into a lot of media types. To the man and women, they all had in their mind (or their editor's mind and they were dutifully following orders) what story they were going to write BEFORE they wrote it and didn't care if they wrote something that put the US military further in harm's way; they had a narrative they were following and everything else be damned...When Bush pulled off that Air Force One flight to Baghdad on Thanksgiving 2003, they were seething that he fooled them and they didn't get to break the story before he arrived (oblivous that insurgent MANPADS (portable SAMs) had already downed one aircraft and "reporting" mission details early would have put everyone on the aircraft in danger).

Let's not forget Dan Rather's little forged Bush ANG memo...Of course, a brilliant mind like his couldn't figure out that in 1972, you typed in either Pica or Elite, not MS Word Times New Roman!

I value the truth, not something that is designed to rile up snowflakes that would be baffled by this:

[video=youtube;tyeJ55o3El0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0[/video]


So it appears what you are trying to say is that based on your limited experiences with the press as well as some anecdotal incidents, your conclusion is generally to not trust the press.. Why do i have a feeling if someone had a negative viewpoint of, say, the US armed services, based on limited experiences and anecdotal evidence, you would have a major problem with that? The broad brushes you paint your argument with can be dangerous.

Limited? Probably more than 90% of America I would guesstimate, since most have not dealt with producers, talking heads. and the like.

I have met a TON of people with negative viewpoints of the armed forces, most of us being in them, because we significantly self-examined our failures to prevent further loss of life. This self-examination is something that doesn't seem to occur in the media, especially given what we discovered in 2016: From providing debate answers to giving story approval to political operatives, it was outright colusion on a large scale. This compromise of the Fifth Estate's role in our republic is much more dangerous than any painting I am doing.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Back
Top