Go for the radial artery, and use a razor.

Do us both a favor.

>Contradictions? Oh, you mean like "Aaron Brooks makes a
>trillion worse decisions than Drew Bledsoe, but he's no less
>aware"? LOL - yeah ok.

*Thunderous applause*

You open your response with a misrepresentation of something I said. Sort of bodes for how shitty rest of this post might be. No fun for me.

Like I just told you, I said "Aaron Brooks might make a trillion worse decisions than Drew Bledsoe" to make that point that any claim in the universe might be true, but you actually must provide evidence for it. You cited two plays last year. Two. Over the past four years, Brooks threw less picks per TD, threw for more yards, threw at a comparable completion percentage, was sacked less per pass attempt, and loses no more games with an inferior defense to the one that Bledsoe plays with.

*I* provided *SOME* evidence.

Not *ALL* the evidence. But *SOME*

*YOU* provided *NO* evidence.

You see, its sort of like if someone were to say "40thStreetBlack is a good poster."

It might be true. The problem is, he's lying, keeps re-using the same Ken O'Brien argument that has absolutely, positively, specifically, not a gatdamn thing to do with Bledsoe versus Brooks specifically, and plus, he(40th) is overall a bitch ass nigga. The last part, while true, is just salt in the wound. The real problem here is that you cannot properly provide evidence for the 17% difference between Bledose and Brooks.

Hell, you say below that you can't do that, nor never said you were trying to.

But I won't let you off the hook that easily.....

>And prove how I've misrepresented one argument of yours. Just
>one.

Read above.

>And somehow all those myriad different topics and opinions all
>boil down to racial conspiracies - funny how that works.

You've managed to lie in consecutive points in your retort post. Why don't you lie and say like...I cheat on my taxes or something....you know...something that isn't verifiable and therefore hard to defend myself against. Your lies are ineffective and too easy to refute.

I have several posts on the board right now, that are everything but discussions of "racial conspiracies." I'm just a regular brother most of the time.

Now when I encounter pussies like you, oh yea, I can breath flames.

>You ARE an inflammatory race-baiter. That's your whole raison
>d'etre on here, and everyone knows it. It's what you're
>singularly known for, because that's all you ever fucking do.

Uh, yeah. That is all I ever do.

You win.

Lol.

>Except that I DID engage your point, and said that I actually
>agree that there's some underlying racism in the ratings
>overall. But when you base your argument on Brooks' awareness
>you look like a reactionary idiot, particularly when you
>contradict your own criteria that you used to make your case.

Uh.

Did you not just say that you don't intend to argue that there is justification for a 17% difference in awareness between Bledose and Brooks? Do you yourself not agree that is a *bit* high?

Than why do you exist on the planet?

Really?

I mean, jump out of a window, and ease your burden on my eco system, you worthless, maginal human being.

>I did check them, and I proved that you don't even stand by
>your own statistical criteria for "awareness." You see, for
>your arguments to be at all logical, they have to be
>consistent. Yours are not. Unless you want to make a case for
>Ken O'Brien being more aware than Phil Simms.

Brought back Ken O'Brien, I see. Dug that corpse up.

You can bury him again:

I never, ever, ever, ever, said that all measures of QB greatness were relegated to quantitative measures. In fact, I INVITED YOU to provide some situations to explain the 17% disparity in Awareness ranking.

In the case of Simms/O'Brien, I can point to Simms' Superbowl victory and exquisite playoff performances. I can point to the fact that actually, Ken O'Brien had TWO WIDE RECIEVERS better than ANY RECEIVER that Simms EVER HAD(Toon and Wesley Walker were BOTH better than like....Bobby Johnson and Phil Mackonkey).

Its Phil Simms awareness specifically that re-invigorated the tight end position--Simms' best target was Bavaro. Before Bavaro. no NFL tight end had put up big numbers since Kellen Winslow Sr. who was a super athlete in an electric offensie. Bavaro was not in Winslow's class athletically. Bavaro did, however, play with a smart QB who knew how to fire it underneath.




God damn.

That was fucking beautiful.



>No, misrepresentation is you saying I held onto my black card
>for legitimacy in the Tillman debate, when I didn't say
>anything about race in regards to that issue at all.

That actually isn't what I meant, but you are doing bad enough in this post, so allow me to say I'm sorry for not phrasing that point correctly.

*pats on head*


>It is a major problem, and pointing out instances and
>discussing how/why racism is impacting them is rather
>innocuous. What is not innocuous is you playing the race card
>for every fucking situation under the sun whether or not
>racism actually has anything to do with it.

LOL.

Well, me and you BOTH AGREE that there are racial undertones in the rankings of NFL
players in a VIDEO GAME.

So we BOTH actually fit way on the left of the race baiter curve relative to most of the people on this BOARD. I'm not even going to discuss where we stand relative to teh average American.

Just count the number of white people IN THIS THREAD who agree that the rankings are indicative of racism.

Stop counting.

Yep.

>So if you want to argue about how racism truly affects our
>society, in education, employment, housing, etc - you know,
>things that actually matter - then cool. If you want to
>discuss it as it pertains to the sports world, such as the
>lack of minorities in coaching and front-office positions or
>something that's an actual problem in sports, then fine.

Lol.

Uh. 99% of my race commmentaries are regarding the above topics specifically. But please, continue construction of the Straw_Orbit.

>But if you want to cry racism when Sammy Sosa gets booed when
>he's hitting .240, or Boggs getting more pub than Gwynn during
>a decade when he hit 20 points higher, or Brooks being
>considered as having low awareness because he throws the
>fucking ball BACKWARDS, then you just come off as a whiny
>self-righteous bitch.

Ah...there's Straw_Orbit. How you been buddy?


How about this:

1) The Sosa situation in Chicago might not have been a racial situation, but its far from obsurd for one to want to speculate, given what I hear about Chicago. Chicago white people might not be Bostonians, but they aren't Bay Area-ites either.

2) You don't lie about my arguments?

Oh.

Because I don't recall saying that Tony Gwynn got less pub than Boggs because of race alone.

I recall mentioning the size of the markets, the relative importance of the Red Sox to baseball as compared to the Pardes, etc.

But its more fun when you lie.

Lol.

3)You don't lie about my arguments part Deux?

Oh.

Because I don't recall suggesting that Aaron Brooks was more aware than Drew Bledose.

I only said there wasn't evidence for the MAGNITUDE OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO.

And you just agreed with me below. You just told me that you don't care to argue that there is evidence for Bledsoe being 17% more aware.

So, have you slit your wrist yet?

>Which of course is your right if you want to be a whiny bitch,
>but the problem is that crying wolf at every little bullshit
>situation like that makes it damn near impossible to have a
>serious discussion on racism.

Uh. Okay.

Actually, smart people can have intelligent conversations with O_E.

Its the "smart people" thing that seems to be your obstacle.


>Based on what? Because you say so? Whatthefuckever. Why don't
>you actually show *how* it was a Ramboesque machismo stunt,
>like him saying "I'm gonna go kick some Middle-Eastern ass" or
>something, not just your horribly biased and wholly
>unsubstantiated opinion.

Man leaving a profession that one loves, to want to go "fight terrorists", voluntarily, without an understanding of the facts, the complications of the situation, without regard for his family, without questioning the swift, irrational way that the Afghanistan "war" was started.......that is "ramboesque-Machismo" to me.

But oddly, I actually *DID* say that I respect people who place some social situation ahead of sports. Again, this dosen't fit in with Straw_Orbit, so ignore.

My beef was the *SPECIFICS* behind Tillman's actions.

*NOT* that he acted.

Is the blood gushing yet?

>So were about 20% of US casualties in WWII. I guess they all
>died meaningless deaths as well - why don't you go over to
>Normandy and piss on their graves too while you're at it?

DOH!!!

Orbit is pissing on WWII Veteran graves by questioning the legitmacy of the Afghan retaliation, and the actions of someone I belive didn't consider the political situation into which he was immersing himself.

HOW "UN-AMERICAN" OF ME!!!!!!

You are officially the most spineless son of a bitch I have ever come across.

Ever.

In history.

The fighers in World War II were actualy fighting a man that was dangerously close to conquering all of Europe and Asia, had already killed 10 million civillians(more than half through the deliberate genocide of ethnic Jews)

For you to even conjure this argument in a discussion about Pat Tillman and the Afghanistan situation is.......first and foremost just a terrible argument(that thankfully, I've shat on) but more importantly, is very neo-conservative. As you recall, ain't that how Bushy rationalized all thie bullshit post 9/11? That we might be dealing with our generations Hitler?

Dude, you make me really want to beat your ass. Seriously.

I think your in the tri-state.

I might have to hop on a train and knock the terrible views from your soul.

>Pissing on Tillman's grave is a rather odd way to mourn him.
>And the blatant cynicism of your crocodile tears for the
>troops is revoltingly hypocritical. Like I said, at least be
>honest about it like 3X instead of being such a gutless
>two-faced bitch.

"Pissing on Tillman's grave."

Wow.

Yeah, that is what criticism of US foreign policy, and a cross examination of the actions of anyone who follows it blindly is.

Nice way to elminate dialogue on the topic, Mr. Rumsfield.

>More misrepresentations: I never said "he's an American hero",
>I simply said I respected what he did. And the details of his
>death don't change that at all; if SI had given him sportsman
>of the year he'd still deserve it, certainly more than the
>fucking Red Sox.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*gasp*

*gasp*

*gasp*

But seriously....

*gasp*

You talk about my ignorance in not know exactly what was going on in the mind of
Pat Tillman--do you know, speficially, that he wanted to rid the world of evil? Or do you simply know that he wanted to go fight in Afghanistan? Not the same animial. In fact, there are lots of rich people who don't like evil in this world, and work tirelessly to eliminate evil in the world. Very few run and try to fight with their hands. Not because they are scared, but because....well...did anyone actually *ask* Tillman to fight? Or did Tillman run and fight, completely unsolicited?

Hmm.

>But self-righteous douchebags like you want to exploit the
>government's lies about his death so you can denigrate Tillman
>himself and say shit like "it was a Ramboesque machismo
>stunt"... "he died a meaningless death", as if he had
>anything to do with the cover-up sham.

Actually, it did.

The entire Afghan "war" was conocted because we needed someone to blame and retaliate against after 9/11. We figured it was an easy government to knock down, so we knocked it down, and the US people temporarily felt retribution. Even our piss poor CIA intelligence understood that the terror network extended far past the caves of Afghanistan. But that wasn't *really* the point. We needed a victory, to feel powerful. People light years less radical than I even agree....mostly because what I'm saying is right.

>*THEY* didn't get drafted either. Nobody forced them to
>enlist.

Yikes.

This is in refernce to friends of mine stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In case you didn't know, a lot of kids enlist in the military for reasons that *DON'T* have to do with wanting to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Kids are like....are poor....and disenfranchised....and want to be a part of something....and want money for college....and want respect.....you know, things like that.

So actually, we should feel sympathy for kids who are getting blown to pieces.....a lot of them want nothing to do with war. A lot of them want the GI Bill, or to make a good living for themselves.

Jeebus.

And I'm the insenstive one.

Now you're implying that we shouldn't feel sympathy for kids fighting overseas because "they enlisted."

Callous, retarded, or both.


>... which is one of the most herbish usernames ever, btw.

Orbit_Established?

Well I'm not the one with slit wrists and bad arguments.

And I get hoes.

>Only the 1,000,001 times or so you've called people naive
>whiteboys over innocuous sports disagreements.

Lying. Cute.

>Yeah, you're too obsessed with my ethnicity to worry about
>that.

I don't even know your ethnicity, and don't care.

You are definately at least half-idiot-ese though.

>Yup. Unless you come up with a compelling argument for Ken
>O'Brien being a more aware QB than Phil Simms.

Wait...what does Ken O'Brien have to do with Pat Tillman? Or....the Aaron Brooks debate, you know, the one where you just said you don't think there exists sufficient evidence to argue for the 17% disparity in awareness ranking?

Or what do any of your arguments have to do with anything?

And who the fuck iz you?

And how long before that blood leaks out and the world is one person less wack?