ADVERTISEMENT

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

I saw the episode.

I agree with Bill 100% in that clip!

ETA: But, you missed the part where he vehemently opposes the electoral college. He's not a republican.
he's obviously not actually a republican, as witnessed for one thing by his complaint that the dems wackiness caused the republican to get elected....but he OFTEN seems like one, espousing much that republicans find fault with the left for. I've been pointing that out for some time now.
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2

Mike Tyson says

I tried to watch. Netflix kept kicking me out. Hope they made a ton of money because the next big streaming "event" they have people may pass due to the issues. Imagine having friends over and not being able to watch? Regardless, sounds like I didn't miss that much and I'm glad the wife and I just went to bed. Saw this and thought I'd link it so people could remember what boxing could be.

try ponying up for the Tyson-Spinks match, friends and food and beer and the whole works, and stepping to the bathroom for a quick wiz before it started, only to come back and find it was already over. I missed the entire bout. Hell, I think even I could have avoided getting punched out that quickly.



I’ve never been a big boxing fan but if more fights looked like that I’d probably start watching.

In those years, boxing in general was nothing short of phenomenal. Any weight class was good, and in fact the lower weights had even more crazy fast and furious action. It spoiled me, and I have now lost interest almost completely. I actually started watching boxing when I was like five, but that was X number of years earlier.

Try to find some old bouts on youtube. I've never looked for any, but I assume they are there. I wouldn't bother with Ali (except against Frazier), there is a lot better to be seen.

Late stuff (American game)...

Free throw shooting this season is a big positive !!

Wash did have a very good game and man his stroke is smooth.

I could get used to seeing EC, Seth and Drake at the 1,2 and 3 spots. I see very few negatives there save Drakes limited PT with the team but that is one helluva athletic trio with some serious defensive chops.
May well be our most effective line up right now. Drake doesn't give the scoring threat that RJ does but he does chip in but defensively Drake is a problem, hitting the boards Drake is a problem, that 7ft reach from Drake, is a problem, bottom line is Drake is already a problem for our opponents, with each game he seems to be an even bigger problem!

Late stuff (American game)...

Interesting game, the first 10mins, to me looked like a serous lack of communication, guys missing their switches and leaving a jump shooter open to often. On offense (1st 10mins) we seemed to try to force some things, seemed clear there was a concerted effort to get RJ cranked up and in doing so the offense seemed to stagnate some. But Elliot Cadeau began to take over, doing Cadeau like things. Kid was every where, didn't need to score a single point but he did. Not enough has been said about his defensive improvement, he is becoming a menace to opposing PGs as a defender.

Last 10mins of that first half our defense was pretty good but give American credit, they simply hit some hard shots, many of their treys were , well ok but no way that lasts, it didn't. There was not a single doubt in my mind after that last 10mins of the first half, this thing was about to get ugly. American started to get in to foul trouble, our defense was getting stronger and that American team was wearing down, inother words those contested jumpers they got in that first half were going to start rimming out and we were about to go on a rip & run spree, we did. Really, only thing that kept this close in that first half was they hit a lot of contested jumpers for 3 and we missed wide open easy jumpers, dang RJ. We were 0 for what ever from trey, despite getting really clean looks, law of averages says that would not continue..

Second half was kinda simple, in addition to the above, Tyson hit a jumper and it was as if the storm gates were opened, the lid cam off the basket and it was just on after that. Cadeau was masterful, JWit had a really nice spurt in that first half, he is making a habit of having those nice spurts. But Drake Powell did a LOT of growing up last night, as they say, Drake is a problem, and Drake is becoming a much bigger problem, he is constant motion, bl;ocking shots (don't ya just love those 2 handed blocks, got 2 of those last night as well as another more standard block), 11 boards and was soaring for them. Drake pulls down a board he is off on a rip and run.

Tyson hitting that trifecta of treys was nice to see but i felt he played hard and well before hitting those. Impressive that we did that without Jack or Brown available, BOTH missed VALUABLE playing time minutes that they both really need. JWash had a nice game and for me maybe the most important madeshot all noight may have been his corner jumper for 2 off an inbounds pass, his being ready and willing to take that can not be over stated, it is critical for this team going forward, he has to do more of that. Felt Lubin just had a solid game, very blue collar lunch pail like. Now, on to Hawaii.

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

recognizing your deep emotional need to virtue-signal is not due to some prejudice of mine. Virtue-signalers demonstrably suck ass, and if you'd watch the video that @poopondook posted you might get some clue as to why that is so. I doubt it though, I'm sure you'll remain clueless. On the other hand it's a shame that you didn't read my post, because I had already made a point of your misuse of the notion of prejudice.
You're just trying to get a kiss from me!

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

"Virtue signaler" provides you all the cover you need. If you'd just own your prejudice you could avoid writing a bunch of shit that I'm not going to read.
recognizing your deep emotional need to virtue-signal is not due to some prejudice of mine. Virtue-signalers demonstrably suck ass, and if you'd watch the video that @poopondook posted you might get some clue as to why that is so. I doubt it though, I'm sure you'll remain clueless. On the other hand it's a shame that you didn't read my post, because I had already made a point of your misuse of the notion of prejudice.
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

This is gold. Things like:

"Black people. They're just like us!" and "Democrats have become like a royal family that, because of so much incest, has unfortunately had children who are retarded."


Login to view embedded media
yes this is gold, like much of what he has posited lately. I keep saying, he walks and talks like a republican; he's just too rooted in his idea of liberalism to BE a republican.
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

right. Let's redefine 'suffering' now. People in poverty aren't suffering. Flood victims in WNC are not really victims and they aren't really suffering. A gazillion Jews didn't suffer during WWII because only illness causes suffering. What else do you need to redefine in a lame attempt to rationalize your misplaced pettiness? While we're at it, let's move those goalposts just enough that my contention doesn't seem to apply. Now suddenly we are no longer addressing, but in fact denying your implication that if you hate the condition, you must hate the person. To that end, we'll just stipulate that you have the most reliable, God-like knowledge that homosexuals are all deliriously happy with their circumstance.

The condition of poverty is not something that I want to exist. The condition of homosexuality is not something that I want to exist. But both do, and more often than not neither the homo or the poor person chose for that to be the case and in many cases in fact wishes it wasn't. I was poor when young and although now I'm fine with having been poor, it was definitely a problem and you can believe it caused suffering. I DID NOT WANT TO BE POOR, but now I'm actually proud to have been that way. Still, I would eliminate poverty if I could and I would eliminate homosexuality if I could, even as I count gay people among my friends and friendly acquaintances. It isn't like I blame them for being that way simply because there is nothing to blame them FOR...except in your twisted world view where any stance not aligned with yours represents bigotry or misogyny or racism or any other -ism excuse for virtue-signaling, as well as your stupidly misused notion of 'prejudice'.

And your virtue-signaling ass knows damn well that both have problems due to their circumstance, because otherwise you'd have nothing to virtue-signal about. Of course, that hasn't seemed to stop you so far, so maybe that isn't such a good point..

"You have also shown that you don't really care about the "misfortune" of the poor or impoverished if they color outside the lines of your world view."

The invectives you casually toss at me exist only in your demented mind. All you can do is state your misguided conclusions. You can not materially validate them. If you ever decide to not be such a petty shithead, try to know what you're talking about and be able to demonstrate it before you call someone a bigot.

I will admit that I am not a 'people person' and I don't cry myself to sleep at night worrying about the human condition. I accept that we will all die and I want everyone to stand on their own two feet in the meantime, as much as possible. But I detest trouble and suffering, and I'm not too fond of problems in general. Sue me..
"Virtue signaler" provides you all the cover you need. If you'd just own your prejudice you could avoid writing a bunch of shit that I'm not going to read.

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

Poverty and poor are completely different... It's like illness. Illness means suffering. You've got this prejudice that people who you believe are confused are actually suffering. That it's "bad" to be these things. The suffering implication only exists from the belief that it should be considered some kind of affliction. Homosexuals even co-opted the word GAY as a term of reference. Gay is the opposite of suffering. Your whole world view is a rigid ideology , and vernacular, that disparages women, feminity, anything that isn't white, Christian masculine in some archaic-traditional sense.

You have also shown that you don't really care about the "misfortune" of the poor or impoverished if they color outside the lines of your world view.
right. Let's redefine 'suffering' now. People in poverty aren't suffering. Flood victims in WNC are not really victims and they aren't really suffering. A gazillion Jews didn't suffer during WWII because only illness causes suffering. What else do you need to redefine in a lame attempt to rationalize your misplaced pettiness? While we're at it, let's move those goalposts just enough that my contention doesn't seem to apply. Now suddenly we are no longer addressing, but in fact denying your implication that if you hate the condition, you must hate the person. To that end, we'll just stipulate that you have the most reliable, God-like knowledge that homosexuals are all deliriously happy with their circumstance.

The condition of poverty is not something that I want to exist. The condition of homosexuality is not something that I want to exist. But both do, and more often than not neither the homo or the poor person chose for that to be the case and in many cases in fact wishes it wasn't. I was poor when young and although now I'm fine with having been poor, it was definitely a problem and you can believe it caused suffering. I DID NOT WANT TO BE POOR, but now I'm actually proud to have been that way. Still, I would eliminate poverty if I could and I would eliminate homosexuality if I could, even as I count gay people among my friends and friendly acquaintances. It isn't like I blame them for being that way simply because there is nothing to blame them FOR...except in your twisted world view where any stance not aligned with yours represents bigotry or misogyny or racism or any other -ism excuse for virtue-signaling, as well as your stupidly misused notion of 'prejudice'.

And your virtue-signaling ass knows damn well that both have problems due to their circumstance, because otherwise you'd have nothing to virtue-signal about. Of course, that hasn't seemed to stop you so far, so maybe that isn't such a good point..

"You have also shown that you don't really care about the "misfortune" of the poor or impoverished if they color outside the lines of your world view."

The invectives you casually toss at me exist only in your demented mind. All you can do is state your misguided conclusions. You can not materially validate them. If you ever decide to not be such a petty shithead, try to know what you're talking about and be able to demonstrate it before you call someone a bigot.

I will admit that I am not a 'people person' and I don't cry myself to sleep at night worrying about the human condition. I accept that we will all die and I want everyone to stand on their own two feet in the meantime, as much as possible. But I detest trouble and suffering, and I'm not too fond of problems in general. Sue me..
ADVERTISEMENT

Filter

ADVERTISEMENT