(09-25-2017 11:19 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  If the dairy industry offered a decent size bloc of votes, I am sure at least one party would jump quickly and wholeheartedly into promoting that divide and injustice.
Some have learned the politics of division and victimhood typically pays off handsomely relative to the effort expended.

Absolutely.

To those people of color who tell me that I don't know what it's like to be black (or brown, or whatever) I say, you're right, I don't, I've never been black (or brown, or whatever). By the same token, you've never been white. So if you want to tell me that I don't understand your situation, fine, but my reply is going to be that, by the same token, you don't understand mine. So I'll make you a deal. I won't tell you what it's like to be black (or brown, or whatever), and you don't tell me what it's like to be white.

Eric Reid's editorial in the 9/25 NY Times is worth a read if you are interested in a player's perspective.

(09-25-2017 02:48 PM)ausowl Wrote:  Eric Reid's editorial in the 9/25 NY Times is worth a read if you are interested in a player's perspective.

When I get a chance, I will give it a look. However, I have Kaepernicks perspective.

"I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color," Kaepernick told NFL Media in an exclusive interview after the game

I presume that the others are supporting that view.

(09-25-2017 01:20 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 11:19 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  If the dairy industry offered a decent size bloc of votes, I am sure at least one party would jump quickly and wholeheartedly into promoting that divide and injustice.
Some have learned the politics of division and victimhood typically pays off handsomely relative to the effort expended.

Absolutely.

To those people of color who tell me that I don't know what it's like to be black (or brown, or whatever) I say, you're right, I don't, I've never been black (or brown, or whatever). By the same token, you've never been white. So if you want to tell me that I don't understand your situation, fine, but my reply is going to be that, by the same token, you don't understand mine. So I'll make you a deal. I won't tell you what it's like to be black (or brown, or whatever), and you don't tell me what it's like to be white.

Given your rationale, one could say "Don't tell me what it's like to be poor and I won't tell you what it's like to be rich."
or
"Don't tell me what it's like to be a woman and I won't tell you what it's like to be a man."
or
"Don't tell me what it's like to be a Muslim and I won't tell you what it's like to be a Christian."

Problems with the above premises:
1. False equivalence;
2. Not much of a sound basis for 'walking a mile in someone else's shoes' (sounds more like "I don't like your shoes and I don't want you walking in mine!");
3. Ignorance of the other person's (family's, group's, culture's etc.) characteristics is at the root of all conflict, especially the tribalism that's threatening to divide America.

(09-26-2017 07:35 PM)ColOwl Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 01:20 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 11:19 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  If the dairy industry offered a decent size bloc of votes, I am sure at least one party would jump quickly and wholeheartedly into promoting that divide and injustice.
Some have learned the politics of division and victimhood typically pays off handsomely relative to the effort expended.

Absolutely.
To those people of color who tell me that I don't know what it's like to be black (or brown, or whatever) I say, you're right, I don't, I've never been black (or brown, or whatever). By the same token, you've never been white. So if you want to tell me that I don't understand your situation, fine, but my reply is going to be that, by the same token, you don't understand mine. So I'll make you a deal. I won't tell you what it's like to be black (or brown, or whatever), and you don't tell me what it's like to be white.

Given your rationale, one could say "Don't tell me what it's like to be poor and I won't tell you what it's like to be rich."
or
"Don't tell me what it's like to be a woman and I won't tell you what it's like to be a man."
or
"Don't tell me what it's like to be a Muslim and I won't tell you what it's like to be a Christian."
Problems with the above premises:
1. False equivalence;
2. Not much of a sound basis for 'walking a mile in someone else's shoes' (sounds more like "I don't like your shoes and I don't want you walking in mine!");
3. Ignorance of the other person's (family's, group's, culture's etc.) characteristics is at the root of all conflict, especially the tribalism that's threatening to divide America.

Umm, no. It's more like, " Don't tell me what it's like to be rich/man/Christian, and I won't tell you what it's like to be poor/woman/Muslim."

Rest of your post is just patently false. Except the last point. I agree that ignorance of another's conditions or characteristics is a major contributor to conflict. In particular, attributing certain characteristics incorrectly to others (poor people are lazy, rich people are greedy, all Muslims are terrorists, all Muslims are kind and sweet, police officers are engaged in a war against blacks) is almost always the root of conflict. When people don't understand each other, coming to that understanding usually reveals a lot more similarities than differences.

(09-26-2017 09:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-26-2017 07:35 PM)ColOwl Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 01:20 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 11:19 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  If the dairy industry offered a decent size bloc of votes, I am sure at least one party would jump quickly and wholeheartedly into promoting that divide and injustice.
Some have learned the politics of division and victimhood typically pays off handsomely relative to the effort expended.

Absolutely.
To those people of color who tell me that I don't know what it's like to be black (or brown, or whatever) I say, you're right, I don't, I've never been black (or brown, or whatever). By the same token, you've never been white. So if you want to tell me that I don't understand your situation, fine, but my reply is going to be that, by the same token, you don't understand mine. So I'll make you a deal. I won't tell you what it's like to be black (or brown, or whatever), and you don't tell me what it's like to be white.

Given your rationale, one could say "Don't tell me what it's like to be poor and I won't tell you what it's like to be rich."
or
"Don't tell me what it's like to be a woman and I won't tell you what it's like to be a man."
or
"Don't tell me what it's like to be a Muslim and I won't tell you what it's like to be a Christian."
Problems with the above premises:
1. False equivalence;
2. Not much of a sound basis for 'walking a mile in someone else's shoes' (sounds more like "I don't like your shoes and I don't want you walking in mine!");
3. Ignorance of the other person's (family's, group's, culture's etc.) characteristics is at the root of all conflict, especially the tribalism that's threatening to divide America.

Umm, no. It's more like, " Don't tell me what it's like to be rich/man/Christian, and I won't tell you what it's like to be poor/woman/Muslim."

Rest of your post is just patently false. Except the last point. I agree that ignorance of another's conditions or characteristics is a major contributor to conflict. In particular, attributing certain characteristics incorrectly to others (poor people are lazy, rich people are greedy, all Muslims are terrorists, all Muslims are kind and sweet, police officers are engaged in a war against blacks) is almost always the root of conflict. When people don't understand each other, coming to that understanding usually reveals a lot more similarities than differences.

There's asymmetry in how much *public knowledge* is *readily* available about social group X, Y, or Z.

Some groups dominate numerically, dominate media, etc. -- the lifestyles or preferences of those groups are well known. Other groups, not so much.

Hence, the blanket statement "You and I have equal amount of ignorance about each other" is *generally* not true, but can be true sometimes, of course.

(09-27-2017 04:51 PM)Bailiff_Lingo_Bingo Wrote:  Hence, the blanket statement "You and I have equal amount of ignorance about each other" is *generally* not true, but can be true sometimes, of course.

Well, it's probably seldom, if ever, precisely correct. But I think it's fair as a general proposition to state that people of different backgrounds typically have more stereotypical perceptions than actual understanding of walking a mile in the other's shoes.

And moving to the sports position from the political-moral-ethics perspective, there is one school that has overtly endorsed and supported Trump. It's Liberty, where the school prez has turned a blind eye towards Trump's groping of women, and basically most all values one on a spiritual quests, and identifying with a religious brand. Trump has lied, deceived, mocked and bullied his way into office.

Then Jerry Falwell, Jr. brings Trump to Liberty to announce LU's FBS initial schedule at the school's May commencement. What other school a) would want to do that and be aligned with Trump, and b) would continually support Trump's actions and policies.

It's tough to be a LU fan if one only enjoys their athletics and does not drink the school/church Kool Aid dogma. Most LU fans blindly follow JFJr's lead without questioning the validity of the position. Jr's alignment with Trump has alienated most level headed, logical thinking, ethical believing fans who would support the athletics of the school.

In fairness to Trump, he did not create the pigeon hole position that LU has created. That righteous "we against the world" attitude or everyone is wrong and we are only the one that is right. The Falwells, both Sr. and Jr. made that bed. But it was JFJr who has aligned himself with Trump, who endorsed students to register and bring firearms on campus and more.

On the LU board, no difference of opinion is allowed that challenges or questions Jr.s positions. Dissidents are slapped with negative reps if the make LU fans mad. So, as a LU fan, who is open and fair minded, it's literally impossible to support the team unless one is a LU team player. That select, closed knit, high-n-mighty club often times plays the martyr card and hides behind most what they profess, like Trump.

And as this is a sports forum, it's more about what happens between the lines than what is professed from the pulpit, podium or brand.

(09-29-2017 07:42 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  And moving to the sports position from the political-moral-ethics perspective, there is one school that has overtly endorsed and supported Trump. It's Liberty, where the school prez has turned a blind eye towards Trump's groping of women, and basically most all values one on a spiritual quests, and identifying with a religious brand. Trump has lied, deceived, mocked and bullied his way into office.

Then Jerry Falwell, Jr. brings Trump to Liberty to announce LU's FBS initial schedule at the school's May commencement. What other school a) would want to do that and be aligned with Trump, and b) would continually support Trump's actions and policies.

It's tough to be a LU fan if one only enjoys their athletics and does not drink the school/church Kool Aid dogma. Most LU fans blindly follow JFJr's lead without questioning the validity of the position. Jr's alignment with Trump has alienated most level headed, logical thinking, ethical believing fans who would support the athletics of the school.

In fairness to Trump, he did not create the pigeon hole position that LU has created. That righteous "we against the world" attitude or everyone is wrong and we are only the one that is right. The Falwells, both Sr. and Jr. made that bed. But it was JFJr who has aligned himself with Trump, who endorsed students to register and bring firearms on campus and more.

On the LU board, no difference of opinion is allowed that challenges or questions Jr.s positions. Dissidents are slapped with negative reps if the make LU fans mad. So, as a LU fan, who is open and fair minded, it's literally impossible to support the team unless one is a LU team player. That select, closed knit, high-n-mighty club often times plays the martyr card and hides behind most what they profess, like Trump.

And as this is a sports forum, it's more about what happens between the lines than what is professed from the pulpit, podium or brand.

Welcome to the Rice Political Board. This board has its ebbs and flows volume-wise, and while there is in no way a monolithic view of politics, the differences here are engaged with a huge amount of respect vis a vis others' opinions.

Glad to have you haunt this swamp with us....

(09-29-2017 07:42 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  That righteous "we against the world" attitude or everyone is wrong and we are only the one that is right.

Sounds like ISIS. Or the popes of 1000 years back. Or the boards of a lot of church schools. Or Antifa.

"We are right, you are wrong" is not new in this world, nor is it unique to Liberty.

FTR, not a fan of either Liberty's athletics or its theology.

(09-29-2017 10:01 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-29-2017 07:42 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  That righteous "we against the world" attitude or everyone is wrong and we are only the one that is right.

Sounds like ISIS. Or the popes of 1000 years back. Or the boards of a lot of church schools. Or Antifa.

"We are right, you are wrong" is not new in this world, nor is it unique to Liberty.

FTR, not a fan of either Liberty's athletics or its theology.

It's always been a paradox to many sports fan that someone (me) who is not affiliated with the school or church, can be a fan of the program. I grew up in Lynchburg and attended the very first sports offered by LU. I have emotional investment for many years with the athletic program. Not the views of the school or the positions of the admins. I just a fan.

My fellow LU board members often times say their perspective being a LU alum has more merit than one who is simply a fan and not an alum (me). I beg to differ. I've defended the school when unfair claims were made against it and I've chastised the school when buffon actions were made or dump statements made on this bbs.

Isn't the best definition of a fan one who supports the team and keeps them in check. To those fans, of any school, who see their university through rose colored glasses, they are simply uninformed, less free thinking, and more a follower than an independent thinker. Followers are ok as most people are. Independent thinkers, who can give praise when warranted, and criticize when needed, provide a greater contribution than a regurgitation of false, fake or unworthy narratives.

(09-29-2017 09:37 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-29-2017 07:42 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  And moving to the sports position from the political-moral-ethics perspective, there is one school that has overtly endorsed and supported Trump. It's Liberty, where the school prez has turned a blind eye towards Trump's groping of women, and basically most all values one on a spiritual quests, and identifying with a religious brand. Trump has lied, deceived, mocked and bullied his way into office.

Then Jerry Falwell, Jr. brings Trump to Liberty to announce LU's FBS initial schedule at the school's May commencement. What other school a) would want to do that and be aligned with Trump, and b) would continually support Trump's actions and policies.

It's tough to be a LU fan if one only enjoys their athletics and does not drink the school/church Kool Aid dogma. Most LU fans blindly follow JFJr's lead without questioning the validity of the position. Jr's alignment with Trump has alienated most level headed, logical thinking, ethical believing fans who would support the athletics of the school.

In fairness to Trump, he did not create the pigeon hole position that LU has created. That righteous "we against the world" attitude or everyone is wrong and we are only the one that is right. The Falwells, both Sr. and Jr. made that bed. But it was JFJr who has aligned himself with Trump, who endorsed students to register and bring firearms on campus and more.

On the LU board, no difference of opinion is allowed that challenges or questions Jr.s positions. Dissidents are slapped with negative reps if the make LU fans mad. So, as a LU fan, who is open and fair minded, it's literally impossible to support the team unless one is a LU team player. That select, closed knit, high-n-mighty club often times plays the martyr card and hides behind most what they profess, like Trump.

And as this is a sports forum, it's more about what happens between the lines than what is professed from the pulpit, podium or brand.

Welcome to the Rice Political Board. This board has its ebbs and flows volume-wise, and while there is in no way a monolithic view of politics, the differences here are engaged with a huge amount of respect vis a vis others' opinions.

Glad to have you haunt this swamp with us....

I'm looking for another forum to land as my Liberty board does not like my cutting edge comments, from a Liberty fan (me). Thanks and I'll pull out my waders and watch for gators.

(09-29-2017 11:54 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  

(09-29-2017 09:37 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-29-2017 07:42 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  And moving to the sports position from the political-moral-ethics perspective, there is one school that has overtly endorsed and supported Trump. It's Liberty, where the school prez has turned a blind eye towards Trump's groping of women, and basically most all values one on a spiritual quests, and identifying with a religious brand. Trump has lied, deceived, mocked and bullied his way into office.

Then Jerry Falwell, Jr. brings Trump to Liberty to announce LU's FBS initial schedule at the school's May commencement. What other school a) would want to do that and be aligned with Trump, and b) would continually support Trump's actions and policies.

It's tough to be a LU fan if one only enjoys their athletics and does not drink the school/church Kool Aid dogma. Most LU fans blindly follow JFJr's lead without questioning the validity of the position. Jr's alignment with Trump has alienated most level headed, logical thinking, ethical believing fans who would support the athletics of the school.

In fairness to Trump, he did not create the pigeon hole position that LU has created. That righteous "we against the world" attitude or everyone is wrong and we are only the one that is right. The Falwells, both Sr. and Jr. made that bed. But it was JFJr who has aligned himself with Trump, who endorsed students to register and bring firearms on campus and more.

On the LU board, no difference of opinion is allowed that challenges or questions Jr.s positions. Dissidents are slapped with negative reps if the make LU fans mad. So, as a LU fan, who is open and fair minded, it's literally impossible to support the team unless one is a LU team player. That select, closed knit, high-n-mighty club often times plays the martyr card and hides behind most what they profess, like Trump.

And as this is a sports forum, it's more about what happens between the lines than what is professed from the pulpit, podium or brand.

Welcome to the Rice Political Board. This board has its ebbs and flows volume-wise, and while there is in no way a monolithic view of politics, the differences here are engaged with a huge amount of respect vis a vis others' opinions.

Glad to have you haunt this swamp with us....

I'm looking for another forum to land as my Liberty board does not like my cutting edge comments, from a Liberty fan (me). Thanks and I'll pull out my waders and watch for gators.

You are welcome here.

Trump outdoes himself with his comments on Puerto Rico and the mayor of San Juan.

(09-30-2017 10:38 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump outdoes himself with his comments on Puerto Rico and the mayor of San Juan.

Yep. He seems to keep coming up with new lows.

Today's Trump outrage:

Trump to Puerto Rico: your hurricane isn’t a “real catastrophe” like Katrina
And it’s “throwing our budget a little out of whack.”

https://www.vox.com/2017/10/3/16411488/t...uerto-rico

Classy!

It's almost like he just found out Puerto Ricans are American citizens and he's really PO'd about it.

And today we literally have headlines saying the Secretary of State does not deny calling the POTUS a "moron".

There are so many lows, and I mean low class lows (Charlottesville, disabled reporter, Mexican judge, ****** grabbing, "lock-her-up", fake news and it goes on and on. After a point, one becomes numb to the next shoe to drop, or the dumb comment made, or rude remark made domestically or in trigger reply in world affairs (North Korea). There is a clear theme here. The nudge to get Donnie elected came from the Russian Facebook/Twitter push. Sure 30-35% of the electorate agrees with his "damn the torpedoes" attitude or "drain the swamp" or "fake news" claims.

That base is less educated, less aware, less disconcerting and more gullible to be enticed by popular rabble rousing. It's a sad commentary that so many people have been so easily swayed. Most any single dumb action by Donnie would be justification for non support. But to his die hard base, who would support him even "if he shot someone on 5th Avenue", it does not matter. He's infallible and they'll support him, like those die hard, partisan politicians and talking heads who supported Nixon prior to the Watergate break-in, during his impeachment and even when he departed office (1971-74). Let's hope Muller brings about sufficient proof that our system was tampered with and advisors, cabinet members, family members and more. Let's hope that stops this madness, for the 65% of the free-thinking population.

(10-03-2017 01:37 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  

(09-30-2017 10:38 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump outdoes himself with his comments on Puerto Rico and the mayor of San Juan.

Yep. He seems to keep coming up with new lows.

Today's Trump outrage:

Trump to Puerto Rico: your hurricane isn’t a “real catastrophe” like Katrina
And it’s “throwing our budget a little out of whack.”

https://www.vox.com/2017/10/3/16411488/t...uerto-rico

Classy!

What is missing is sympathy for the residents of Puerto Rico. None, zero. It's about the great job FEMA or the Governor is doing. The tossing of paper towns like one is attempting a foul shot just lowers the bar another notch. And squawking about the budget when lives are at state is par for the course with this buffoon.

Trump reminds me of the Rodney Dangerfield character in "Caddyshack." He has an uncanny capacity for saying exactly the wrong thing at the wrong time. He's been just about what I expected, which is why I didn't vote for him. I still think that Hillary would have been about what I expected from her, which is why I didn't vote for her.

Republicans are stupid, and they're all that's standing between us and the socialist/communist democrats. Not a great place to be.