DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Roger pulls a 180

I dont disagree ....

Great post ... thanks for sharing your story ...

Oh Ok. So in other words you feel a need to shred NFL players here on a political forum to prove your perceived patriotism is intact. Got it, thanks.

The Browns would be better right now if the two QBs on our roster were Kaepernick and Manziel... doesn't matter which one starts.

Throw Tebow in as the third on the depth chart. Between the three, at least the media would never get time to discuss how bad we are.

Question? not trying start an argument because we all have our opinions but I was wondering how some of you guys think Kaepernick is such a great QB? I mean when he won with the 49ers all I saw was a Great Defense and a Great Run Game and if he was as good as some think why hasn't a team picked him up I mean doesn't wins outweigh politics in the NFL ... Just wondering

If all the QB's who have played for the Browns was as good as Colin Kaep. We'd have a few more wins.

And the problem with so many people these days is, they actually think this is about politics and patriotism, and not racial equality.

Don't confuse me thinking he's better than we have had... with me thinking he was great.... you don't have to raise the bar very high to be better than what we've had.

Who's raising the bar? The bar has been laying on the ground for years. Nobody is raising the bar and that's the main problem. The FO must get a veteran QB to mentor these guys ASAP. Hue ain't cutting it as the QB whisperer here.

Thanks for the replies guys... even you Swish, even though you still don't get it

CHS... a couple topics you brought up..

1) Bodycams.... currently there's an increasing comfort and desire on the part of law enforcement to actually want to wear the body cams. I'm slated to be a part of our first batch sometime this year. I'm actually looking forward to it.. and I was originally one of those who weren't a big fan of them in the beginning. And here's why: it's not that I have a problem with the public seeing how I do my job. I'm perfectly comfortable with how I engage citizens and conduct myself, and with how my squad operates. I really am blessed to have such a great group of officers to work with.

The stress and reluctance to them stemmed mostly from those admin types who have nothing better to do than review film and nit pick and jam you up for nonsense. There are some folks I run in to and will say "Hey, is your old lady still giving you sh*t"? On the face that may be deemed unprofessional, but being plain spoken (and exercising good judgement when I am) helps build a rapport with people. I mean, should I really have to talk like a robot at all times in order to be "professional"?

But now that more cams have been implemented, we're seeing the evidentiary value they have.

I know there have been questions about when they turn on and off... that could be guys doing that to avoid getting caught doing things they aren't supposed to.. or it could be a matter of how their department's policy is written. Anyone with any tech knowledge I think can appreciate the logistics and support required in order to maintain such massive amounts of data.

Plus, cops like most people, don't readily embrace change at their jobs. You get in a groove, you figure out what works best for you, and human nature makes it difficult to readily accept suggestions on how to fix things that aren't broken.


In regards to the kid in my story... he may be rotten... but he was also polite and respectful towards me. That leads me to believe that he does have a sense of right and wrong. How well developed that sense is...??

I do believe he is more than likely a product of his environment. The chicken or the egg question as to how that environment got so toxic I don't think is all that relevant anymore because it's become a self sustaining monster so to speak. It's why we have topics called the Cycle of Violence, the Cycle of Poverty, etc. IMO we're at the point of having to try and figure out how we get off this crazy ride. It's a multi-faceted problem, one that I don't think people are being honest about, and I think too often the solutions are always being left for "someone else" to figure out. Which kind of leads me in to my final reply..

You put forward a good question about expecting more from the cultures (police) than maybe you would out of the cultures they serve.

First, I don't disagree with the concept of holding cops to a higher standard. I think it's natural to do that with anyone in a position of authority: police, teachers, parents, community leaders, etc.

What I have a problem with is that these days when we people say cops should be held to a higher standard, it is said to take the burden of responsibility on the part of the citizen. As if cops should have a code of conduct that is expected of them, but the people they are dealing with don't. That the cops are expected to behave decency and respect in a community, but that the people in those communities aren't expected the do the same.

Let me ask you this... why does it have to come down to a question of who should have more responsibility? Does that question even make sense? After all, you and I may have different philosophies and ideologies, but we both have the same understanding of Right and Wrong don't we? We may come from different cultures, but our concepts of manners are pretty much the same right?

So what is it that I as a cop should have a better sense of what is wrong than someone who isn't? Drinking and Driving is wrong. Flat out. If you and I both get hammered, and both get arrested for it.. what exactly makes my offense worse than yours? Is it the hypocrisy of a cop getting busted? Does hypocrisy actually make what I did more wrong? If so, does it make what you did less wrong?

And so in our communities, don't the people who live there have are responsibility to maintain and improve where they live? It seems to me that if communities truly were communities (and I mean of all types), many if not most problems there could be solved with out having some stranger with a badge come in to play. It's best saved for another topic at another time, but I will tell you that the concept of neighbors and neighborhood are going the way of the dodo.. not just poor neighborhoods, but suburban neighborhoods as well as the well off. People just don't connect anymore like they used to.

Letting McCown go may be the biggest mistake this FO's made by far.

(the reason it's not in purple is because it may very well be too true to be sarcastic about )

The protest may be about racial equality, and this is what a lot of people do not understand, is that the national anthem represents pride in one's country, its values. And when someone sees another person desecrating those values (even for a worthy cause), it represents disrespect to those who honor that anthem (flag). That is why IMHO the protest should be done in another way. So the protest is about patriotism.

The Jacksonville Jags apologized for kneeling in England.

Why can't the protest occur right be fore the opening kickoff when the players are on the field?

Right before the K is ready to kickoff, all participants can kneel and then rise and then have the kickoff.

It's an interesting dilemma. Usually this breaks down into the usual 'sides', with liberals saying it's all about poverty and conservatives saying it's about culture. People get pissed and start tossing around the usual snowflake stuff and accusations of racism and nobody learns anything.

I'm reminded of a certain breakthrough in string theory-- that wacky 10 dimensional theory consisting of our 3 spacial dimensions, plus time, plus 6 dimensions of hyperspace-- that attempts to explain all particles and forces in nature.

At one point there were five different superstring theories that had their own merits. It was unclear which was the correct one until M-theory came around and showed that they were all correct. They had to be connected together and unified from an even higher dimension. That's the layman's explanation for it. Maybe someone with more intimate knowledge of the subject can add more detail, but the specifics don't matter for the analogy that I'm trying to use.

Maybe just viewing the violence, entitlement culture, the poverty, school performance, or culture by itself is a foolish thing to do. Perhaps there is some other unifying characteristic that ties everything together. Is there something else that can be viewed from a higher dimension, or a different angle, that directly influences all of those things? What does it all have in common? These are the questions we need to ask ourselves.

Unfortunately, someone else is going to have to figure this one out. I'm playing the philosopher here. Someone else is going to have to piece together the puzzle.

Did the players who kneeled for The Star-Spangled Banner and stood for God Save the Queen apologize or did some lawyer or P.R. person apologize? If it was the players then I'd be somewhat impressed.

???

You do realize you already provided the answer to your own question months ago, right?

I even agreed with you. It’s blatantly obvious and I’m surprised you already forgot.

It would appear, based on this: http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2017/10/17...-in-london.html

it was the Jag's president that sent the letter/e-mail to the director of military affairs and veterans.

Make of it what you will.

??

Someone else must have been posting on my account.

Not really.

Thanks for the link.

What I make of it is the Jaguars President is (rightfully) embarrassed by the conduct of his players, many of whom stood for a foreign anthem, on foreign soil, and kneeled for the American Anthem. He did the right thing by apologizing to local military leaders.

However, he is not the one who should apologize. Those players who did the act in the first place should apologize, and if they don't, their silence speaks volumes.

Didn’t the owner also join in with his players? The president calling out the players but not the owner who actively took part and supported his players.

From the article:

Right, so it’s odd seeing the president take aim at the players but not his boss who took part in it.

Obviously he can’t throw his own boss under the bus, but that only means whatever letter this dude wrote means jack.

It didn’t come from the players and it didn’t come from the owner who supported said players.

Oh well.

I don't think anybody disapproves of the locking arms gesture. What are you talking about?

It was still in support of the players overall protest, which was the issue. What are YOU talking about?

Khan was in support of all his players protesting.

What I'm talking about is that it is sad when some prima donna millionaire athletes go to a foreign nation to play a game and then kneel for our Anthem and then stand for theirs. That's an even bigger slap in the face than when it is done here.

Standing in solidarity with locked arms is fine-- a nice gesture and a reasonable compromise.

I don't want to hear an apology from some lawyer or President in the Jaguars front office. I want to hear it from the players! Of course, that would require acknowledging and admitting they were in the wrong the first place. Doubtful.

Because it wasn’t wrong what they did.

You want an apology from the players when none is warranted. Dunno how you were raised but we don’t apologize for doing the right thing where I’m from.

Is it fair to say that you don't think the Jaguars President should have apologized, either?

If he felt he should apologize for his own personal actions that day then I support him doing so if that how he feels.

But to apologize for the players actions when the players themselves probably aren’t sorry for what they did(which I agree) is a waste of time and ultimately meaningless.

I see where you're coming from. It's not all that different than one of the points I made-- it's ultimately meaningless that the Jaguars President apologized (not that there's anything wrong with him doing so.)

I don't see the problem and I think people are getting bent out of shape over nothing. They are protesting and making a point about race and racial profiling in the USA thus, kneeling during the US anthem. It also gets their message across to an even wider audience (UK and Europe), which is a good thing. For them to kneel during the English anthem would have been kinda bogus as I am sure they probably have little clue or idea about social injustices in the UK nor do they have a voice to make a legit stand about it one way or the other. So, for them to stand in unity during the playing of the English anthem was done out of respect for their host nation who invited them over.

Honestly, I think you are getting upset over very little.

Way back in high school I tried to read Michu Kaku's book on the subject. He had me through the first several chapters but then all of a sudden it took a leap light years beyond my comprehending.

There is a unifying theory to this topic: it's simply starting off with common sense and an admission of the things we all share in common.

No one wants to be robbed, have their house broken in to, get hit by a drunk driver, etc. No one wants their kids to have a sub-par education. People want to be treated decently and I believe most people wish to treat others in kind.

The beauty of the concept of America was that you don't have to belong to any particular race or religion in order to ascribe to those things.

Sure there's talk of "unity"... but it's only unity in the outcome. It totally ignores the unifying things that we already share, that if they weren't ignored, could be used as a basis for true progress.

And I don't know if that many people are truly a-holes, or if it's a generational/modern day cultural thing where by 'conversation' is equivalent to trying to shame and intimidate people in to coming around to one's way of belief vs. taking ownership of the responsibility to prove your case in the face of doubt or questions. Hell, people can't even agree on the most basic premises of any one topic!

But it is what it is I suppose. But I don't believe the language and format of dialogue is going to improve until we start holding people to a standard of conduct. I still stand by my original post and my comments about always being called a racist, etc. In my mind it doesn't matter how important the topic is, if people are going to conduct themselves that way, and be so blatantly intellectually dishonest, there is no possible way it can move forward and by dignifying that kind of thing with our participation, it only enables more of the same poor conduct.

If this is a topic that is as legitimate as they claim it is, seems to me that they would spend more time trying to come up with effective ways to communicate the issue vs. blaming else for why they are trying to get a square peg in a round hole.

i've noticed you do way more dialogue with people who already agree with you than the people who actually have a problem with you.

safe space.

Why are you so angry Swish. Is your life that bad?

You just nailed one of his points for him. Heck we can't even get into the crux of the discussion without you starting the hostility.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/aug/06/black-lives-matter-uk-found-vital-social-justice

A couple snippets:


Why does this all sound so familiar?

how did anything i say come off as hostile? sorry but that is soft. everytime i say something you guys always gotta state that i'm angry or hostile or mad about something. you threatened by me or something?

sorry but that's stupid of you to say. and i didn't nail one of his points. its crazy how you guys will pat each other on the back and just agree with each other and think you're doing anything productive.

it would be like me agreeing with another liberal on a topic and thinking it's productive. if you aren't discussing it with someone of opposing views then what are you really accomplishing?

oh, and if you have a problem with how i post, there's an ignore feature.

again, why is it always that i'm angry on this board? everytime i post one of you conservatives always gotta act like i'm angry about something. all that ends up being is a deflection that way you don't have to actually address my comments.

and you never address my actual comments.

Because it comes from the same place.

If you can't pick out the hostility there then I can't help you. Even Dawg Duty thought the same thing, and I had not seen his post when I made mine.

It's hostile because a Dawg made a perfectly amicable post, trying to start a dialogue that is important to you, and you respond with this:


Not the best way to kick off a friendly conversation, even if you've said much worse.

You nailed his point about people conducting themselves a certain way... scroll up and read it again if you care to.

Go ahead and keep acting like you do in these threads. Just don't go whining about your treatment in return.

Once again: I do not put people on ignore.