Some thoughts on the NFL

[Hoofbite]

Given the concussion issues, there are some who believe their won't be an NFL in 20 years.
I'm not one of those, but changes are needed.

How the NFL is being watched, especially by millenniels is changing. They would rather watch YouTube highlights than sit in front of a TV for 3+ hours. Especially when a third of that time is commercials.

Viewership is evolving quickly and the NFL needs to keep up or it will fall far behind. Listening of the old schools families like the Mara's and Rooney's will be a receipe for disaster.

The number of breaks in the game is excessive. I hope they work on this.

 

[waldoputty]

What are you even talking about?

I have no idea if Lee was "extreme" but either way he was the leader of the Confederacy's military and he chose to invade Maryland. Quite frankly I am not interested in oversimplified categorizations in an effort to understand complex issues. The southern elites are not really analogous to the japanese elites from a century later.

And who exactly is cooking up conspiracy theories that the Navy command tried to "trick" Japan into an assault? As @adbutcher pointed out we are getting overwhelmed by ignorance.

i did not say Lee was extreme.
he did not fire the 1st shot if i recall correctly.

i certainly did not try to compare the southern elite to the japanese.
someone brought up ww2 and i just said made the point that there are suspicions were 'tricked' into it.
i dont remember what originate this.
i do recall a primary argument was that the aircraft carriers were not in pearl harbor during the attack.
also i believe that the US already broke the japanese's code? is that right?
i also recall that the japanese need oil for their conquests and we were working against their interest.
though i dont recall any details.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

i am just saying that slaves ultimately benefited even if it was economics driven.

Ultimately? You don't think the slaves themselves should decide for themselves if emancipation was their desired outcome? I'm not even going to bring up specifically what went on in the Jim Crow south following reconstruction.

I hope it's not lost on anyone the irony of the guy who has William Wallace as his avatar claiming that the slaves were no better off after freedom.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It is part of the great game. The 1%, which is actually less than 1% has fooled the poor and disenfranchised whites to take up their divisive cause. Chris Rock had a joke that if poor white folks knew how the ultra rich lived, they would burn this country to the ground. The poor and the middle class regardless of race, creed, or ethnicity are in the same boat as each other but we are all rowing in different directions and that is by design. Poor white folks that fought for the south were duped and they are still being duped. Looking at the literacy rates in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, and South Carolina will blow your freaking mind and that's how the powers want it.

Yeah its well documented how the plantation owners would make common cause over race and yankees with the poor white southerners who for the most part did not have the facility to own and support slaves.

Now its moved to race and liberals. It's just a good thing there is not a clear geographic division.

 

[xwalker]

We are going to have to agree to disagree. I don't make it a habit of making arguments against delusional people. We are collectively screwed by ignorance, hopefully we can win another super bowl before it all goes to pot.

There is no ignorance. I'm confident in my IQ and of anything that I spend time analyzing.

There was a time that I would not have believed it either and I'm generally not a conspiracy theorist type person.

The reality is that the Civil War was about white men in the North increasing their power and money. They didn't give a rip about slaves. If they did, they would have done more for them before and after the war.

There were many other options that the North could have pursued before it came to war.

 

[waldoputty]

Ultimately? You don't think the slaves themselves should decide for themselves if emancipation was their desired outcome? I'm not even going to bring up specifically what went on in the Jim Crow south following reconstruction.

I hope it's not lost on anyone the irony of the guy who has William Wallace as his avatar claiming that the slaves were no better off after freedom.

actually i dont know anything about william wallace other than some movie about scotland was made

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

i did not say Lee was extreme.
he did not fire the 1st shot if i recall correctly.

i certainly did not try to compare the southern elite to the japanese.
someone brought up ww2 and i just said made the point that there are suspicions were 'tricked' into it.
i dont remember what originate this.
i do recall a primary argument was that the aircraft carriers were not in pearl harbor during the attack.
also i believe that the US already broke the japanese's code? is that right?
i also recall that the japanese need oil for their conquests and we were working against their interest.
though i dont recall any details.

The first shot was decided by General Beauregard. That is besides the point though. The war did not get going in earnest until Lee invaded Maryland. The northern population was not compelled by the taking of a South Carolinian fort. The North's mobilization was not at the behest of extremists.

So now your conspiracy was that we had broken the code and know the attack was coming and allowed them to sink a battleship and several other vessels?

We had holdings in the Phillipines and China but that is besides the point. That conspiracy is pretty ignorant on several levels.

 

[adbutcher]

Yeah its well documented how the plantation owners would make common cause over race and yankees with the poor white southerners who for the most part did not have the facility to own and support slaves.

Now its moved to race and liberals. It's just a good thing there is not a clear geographic division.

Yep, many sent their sons out to die over a lie. Slave owners waged a losing war to keep their slaves and the poor and disenfranchised paid the ultimate price. In any case, like I have said before thank goodness the north won, it is too bad that those in the south are still fighting a losing war. In my opinion, the new frontier is birthrates. 40 years from now, the demographics will change significantly in this country, wall or no wall. I think fear of that is scaring the hell out of a lot of people. Also, don't get me started on the ill effects of climate change that will occur if we don't change our ways in 40 years.

 

[adbutcher]

There is no ignorance. I'm confident in my IQ and of anything that I spend time analyzing.

There was a time that I would not have believed it either and I'm generally not a conspiracy theorist type person.

The reality is that the Civil War was about white men in the North increasing their power and money. They didn't give a rip about slaves. If they did, they would have done more for them before and after the war.

There were many other options that the North could have pursued before it came to war.

Ignorance has zero to do with IQ.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

actually i dont know anything about william wallace other than some movie about scotland was made

My Son, freedom is best, I tell thee true, of all things to be won. Then never live within the Bond of Slavery.

His clan's motto was "For Freedom."

 

[xwalker]

General Lee is a good example of what the OP is getting at.

For the southern racist there is perhaps no greater sacred cow. You do not question the sanctity of his decisions no matter what.

What they should have done is examine his decisions critically. For example: what if he had not attacked Maryland in 1861. Would the North ever been able to get the population to go along with conscription, income tax, and all of the other devices that were used to beat the south?

It certainly did not seem to be the case leading up to his invasion.

There is a saying that the first person to complain about the smell of a fart it the one that did it.

 

[CCBoy]

In the face of Constitutional Amendment and how the SCOTUS was ruling? Yes I did say that. You really like taking things out of context.

That was the point. They could no longer control the legislature and the writing was on the wall for a Constitutional Amendment. They were doing everything they could to prevent emancipation.

You really are doing a good job dropping your trousers with the whole line about how slaves were no better off than when they were free though.

The climate for change was very intense at that point in time.

Texas was given the choice to become a state, just prior to that. That was as much about being an aggressive new Republic in a zone that might have allowed the aggressive new country to actually have expanded to the Pacific where they had become dominant and effective in handling the Indian problems. The Louisiana Purchase opened a huge amount of territory, but it was basically unoccupied during those days.

For their survival, the anglo saxon United States, were hard pressed with the added burden of a concept including manifest destiny.

 

[waldoputty]

The first shot was decided by General Beauregard. That is besides the point though. The war did not get going in earnest until Lee invaded Maryland. The northern population was not compelled by the taking of a South Carolinian fort. The North's mobilization was not at the behest of extremists.

So now your conspiracy was that we had broken the code and know the attack was coming and allowed them to sink a battleship and several other vessels?

We had holdings in the Phillipines and China but that is besides the point. That conspiracy is pretty ignorant on several levels.

It is not my conspiracy. Found you a few things.
1st and 2nd about Roosevelt, and 3rd about the 3 missing aircraft carriers during the Pearl Harbor attack.

1. https://www.thenewamerican.com/cult...pearl-harbor-hawaii-was-surprised-fdr-was-not

2. "Roosevelt was forceful enough in the Atlantic to cause some observers to think that Hitler might take up the challenge in circumstances favorable to his own malevolent designs. In the Pacific, however, the President was prepared to be conciliatory. Over a period of months, he had resisted the tempting advice of several members of his cabinet who had urged him to adopt stringent measures. One of these activists, Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes, had been given additional responsibility as petroleum coordinator for national defense. A month before the Japanese government sent its troops into southern French Indochina in the summer of 1941, Ickes recommended to the President that shipments of oil to Japan be stopped immediately. In a brief reply that skated on the edge of sarcasm, FDR said, "Please let me know if this would continue to be your judgment if this were to tip the delicate scales and cause Japan to decide either to attack Russia or to attack the Dutch East Indies." 1 When Ickes argued the case, the President pressed his own point of view. He said that a knock.down, drag.out fight was taking place in Tokyo. Japan's leaders were trying to figure out which way to jump—whether to invade the Soviet Far East or the South Seas or whether to "sit on the fence and be more friendly with us." The decision was anyone's guess, "but, as you know," he told Ickes, "it is terribly important for the control of the Atlantic for us to keep peace in the Pacific. I simply have not got enough Navy to go round—and every little episode in the Pacific means fewer ships in the Atlantic." 2 Once Japanese troops began moving into southern Indochina, however, a new situation was created. 3 The President consequently changed his mind about the way to react. He first suggested that Japan join with the United States and other powers to treat Indochina as a neutralized country in the nature of a Far Eastern Switzerland (an idea to which Tokyo proved to be unresponsive); Roosevelt then sent a message in a language everyone could understand: Overnight, he froze all Japanese assets in the United States. 4 Although he did not reveal his intentions, his order was soon processed through lower levels of bureaucratic consultation into a full trade embargo, thus stopping the shipment of oil to Japan. 5"

3. "Proof of a conspiracy by person or persons in the United States is frequently provided by the comment, "Well, it's a fact that the carriers were hustled out of Pearl just hours before the attack, and the old battleships were jammed in to become targets." To examine the facts surrounding the mystery of the missing carriers and the presence of so many battleships, we need to review the original documents and have the principle players tell the story themselves. On Nov. 26th, 1941, Adm. Kimmel received a message from the Navy Dept. It advised that an agreement had been reached with the War Dept. concerning reinforcement of Wake and Midway. The message started off, “In order to keep the planes of the Second Marine Aircraft Wing available for expeditionary use OPNAV has requested and Army has agreed to station twenty five Army pursuit planes at Midway and a similar number at Wake provided you consider this feasible and desirable. It will be necessary for you to transport these planes and ground crews from Oahu to these stations on an aircraft carrier.” (Navy Court of Inquiry, p. 1177 (Navy)) Adm. Kimmel, upon learning that the Army planes were allowed to fly no more than 15 miles from land, decided to reinforce the two islands with naval aircraft. Notice the phrase “provided you consider this feasible and desirable” is included. The trips would be made only if Kimmel thought them possible. When Adm. Kimmel was asked if he considered this message “a directive or a suggestion”, he replied, “I considered it as a suggestion, …” (Navy, p. 238) He reiterated that thought in Admiral Kimmel's Story, stating "...I would have rejected the Navy Department's suggestion to send carrier to Wake and Midway..."[2] When asked about this Adm. Stark, Chief of Naval Operations, testified, “The dispatch was not a directive of execution. It distinctly puts up a proposition and states, ‘Provided you consider it feasible and desirable.’ ” (Navy, p. 32) Adm. Kimmel responded to the Nov. 26th message on Nov. 28th. “…in this letter I also stated the arrangements I had made for handling material for planes and ground crews at Wake and Midway and of the fact that I was sending the Enterprise and the Lexington to Midway.” (Navy, p. 239-240)"

 

[DandyDon1722]

Yep, many sent their sons out to die over a lie. Slave owners waged a losing war to keep their slaves and the poor and disenfranchised paid the ultimate price. In any case, like I have said before thank goodness the north won, it is too bad that those in the south are still fighting a losing war. In my opinion, the new frontier is birthrates. 40 years from now, the demographics will change significantly in this country, wall or no wall. I think fear of that is scaring the hell out of a lot of people. Also, don't get me started on the ill effects of climate change that will occur if we don't change our ways in 40 years.

Perfectly said. I just would like to add this - the best analysis of recent America I can come up with.

There are 12 cookies. The 1% have 9 the middle class has 2 and the poor have 1 - the 1% leaned into the middle class and told them - hey, the poor just stole one of your cookies - and the middle class bought never even aware of where they are in their ever shrinking world because they are scared.

I continue to believe technology may be the saving grace and equal the playing field at least where we can enjoy life without so much poverty.

 

[waldoputty]

His clan's motto was "For Freedom."

ok, excuse my low IQ, but what the heck is that supposed to mean. are you saying he is a good guy or a bad guy?

 

[adbutcher]

Perfectly said. I just would like to add this - the best analysis of recent America I can come up with.

There are 12 cookies. The 1% have 9 the middle class has 2 and the poor have 1 - the 1% leaned into the middle class and told them - hey, the poor just stole one of your cookies - and the middle class bought never even aware of where they are in their ever shrinking world because they are scared.

I continue to believe technology may be the saving grace and equal the playing field at least where we can enjoy life without so much poverty.

Love the analogy, I would only add that the amount of cookies are the same but currently the .9% have 11.75 of the cookies and the poor and middle class are struggling to obtain .25 cookies. The imbalance of wealth is startling to say the least.

 

[xwalker]

has zero to do with IQ.

The discussion is about historical events. I'm not condoning the South's actions in terms of slavery. Claiming that I'm condoning it would indeed be ignorant.

The reality is that the country was torn apart and ten of thousands of young men died in a war that could have been avoided.

Let me give you a side example or reality vs what is advertised.

Hotels have these little signs that say you can save the environment by reusing towels. In reality, their bean counters figured out that the Hotels would make more money if people reused the towels. They don't give a rip about the environment. In fact they originally tried to do it without referencing the environment and the results were poor. Then they figured out they could play on peoples emotions and created the Save the Environment by reusing your towels concept.​

The leaders in the North didn't care about the slaves. If they did they would have done more to help them after the war. Instead they sent carpetbaggers to the South to extract as much money and power from there as possible while doing nothing for the ex-slaves that had no jobs and basically had to go back to functioning as slaves in terms of their work and living conditions.

 

[adbutcher]

The discussion is about historical events. I'm not condoning the South's actions in terms of slavery. Claiming that I'm condoning it would indeed be ignorant.

The reality is that the country was torn apart and ten of thousands of young men died in a war that could have been avoided.

Let me give you a side example or reality vs what is advertised.

Hotels have these little signs that say you can save the environment by reusing towels. In reality, their bean counters figured out that the Hotels would make more money if people reused the towels. They don't give a rip about the environment. In fact they originally tried to do it without referencing the environment and the results were poor. Then they figured out they could play on peoples emotions and created the Save the Environment by reusing your towels concept.​

The leaders in the North didn't care about the slaves. If they did they would have done more to help them after the war. Instead they sent carpetbaggers to the South to extract as much money and power from there as possible while doing nothing for the ex-slaves that had no jobs and basically had to go back to functioning as slaves in terms of their work and living conditions.

Ok, you bated me in. I don't care about what the north cared about as long as the end result was the end of slavery. Any argument you make is nonsensical in my opinion because an avoided war would have left slavery in existence. Unless you have a time machine to prove your claim. The south would have never willingly abolished slavery. Hell, Texas didn't let slaves know they were free until long after they were emancipated.

 

[xwalker]

ok, excuse my low IQ, but what the heck is that supposed to mean. are you saying he is a good guy or a bad guy?

@FuzzyLumpkins is just taking shots at me. Intellectually, he knows I'm right, but emotionally he can't accept it.

He knows that the North was motivated by things other than slavery but he won't admit to it because of his emotional hatred against the South because of slavery. In reality only the elite plantation owners owned slaves.

Does anyone believe that all of the South rallied to go to war just to protect the elite plantation owner's rights to own slaves? No, Billy Bob Nobody didn't go to war just because the North wanted to abolish slavery. The North wanted to take over the South for it's own purposes which they basically did after the war.

 

[waldoputty]

@FuzzyLumpkins is just taking shots at me. Intellectually, he knows I'm right, but emotionally he can't accept it.

He knows that the North was motivated by things other than slavery but he won't admit to it because of his emotional hatred against the South because of slavery. In reality only the elite plantation owners owned slaves.

Does anyone believe that all of the South rallied to go to war just to protect the elite plantation owner's rights to own slaves? No, Billy Bob Nobody didn't go to war just because the North wanted to abolish slavery. The North wanted to take over the South for it's own purposes which they basically did after the war.

i think fuzzy actually said economics wear interlinked.
i am a follow-the-$ money, so i naturally put the biggest emphasis on $.

i do find a few things you said disturbing.
like equating Grant to Hitler.
destroying the enemy forces and kill the will to fight is not equated to gas chambers and having fun 'experimentally trying to change people's eye color to blue.
i am not going to make any judgment from you because what you say can be attributed to someone who holds a grudge against the north.

so what the heck does the william wallace thing mean?