StrangeSox

I can't imagine how bad this team would be right now under lovie given the injuries and age of the defense

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 9, 2013 -> 08:23 PM) And I assume the amount of people who want to give Cutler 15mil+ next year is getting smaller and smaller. Why?

Brandon Marshall is a beast

How is anyone out there in short sleeves

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 7, 2013 -> 07:23 PM) So (humble brag, btw) Ohio State is offering me a funded position into a PhD program there and when I told my dad the good news, the first thing he says is "now you can finally get that tattoo you wanted" congrats!

I think it's sort of along those lines, "remember the time we got bombed, a bunch of sailors were killed and we were dragged into a global war with Spaghettios!" It's like that Marriott in San Diego or wherever that had free muffins for an hour in memory of 9/11. Ok, you're trying to make a gesture, but don't do it in such a ridiculous way.

QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 7, 2013 -> 05:39 PM) Again, if it seemed I was using noble savage to describe the Native Americans that was not my intent. I never intended to group anyone together. I'm sorry if any of my responses were overly aggressive. they weren't intended to be, I was just firing off quick replies on my phone

Pretty good read on Mandela and getting him right: http://blogs.swarthmore.edu/burke/blog/201...nelson-mandela/

QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 7, 2013 -> 05:21 PM) Yet in the context that a group in isolation from other humans are inherently good, not evil is positive. I did not believe I was calling Native Americans noble savages, if I left that impression, I am sorry. I was trying to argue that it is possible for humans to not be blood thirsty racists out to take each other's stuff. That it is not an inherent trait. AmerIndians were no more or less inherently good or evil, though. Some were bloodthirsty, petty tyrants. Some weren't. They're human, just like Europeans or Africans or aborigines or Mongolians or Indians etc. etc. etc. Lumping all of this different groups together under one and then pointing to them as "inherently good" is exactly the dehumanizing thing. Even ostensibly positive stereotypes are damaging when they cause others to overlook the real, actual humanity in people and groups.

Dams can be hugely destructive for ecosystems, and a lot of (non-hydroelectric) dams are being removed from rivers across the country.

QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 7, 2013 -> 05:16 PM) Really? I've always seen it in the debate of whether humans are inherently good or evil. Sure, that's one way it's deployed. But then, look at how it's being used: tens of millions of people from vastly different cultures getting all lumped together as one for a philosophical argument. Pretty dehumanizing. AmerIndians were no more or less noble or savage than any other wide group of human cultures.

QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 7, 2013 -> 02:44 PM) How so? It's a patronizing stereotype that washes over the vast diversity of peoples and cultures and their struggles and triumphs and flaws. AmerIndians fought and traded and worked together, damaged the environment and preserved it in others just like various groups of Europeans have. The Noble Savage is just a romanticized and sanitized version of dozens of cultures mashed together. It, like the native warrior, may be 'positive' stereotypes, but they're still stereotypes that strip away the actual humanity.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 7, 2013 -> 03:02 PM) Yup. We took it all then gave some back. Its their fault for losing the war. Want the land? Win the war. Interesting how the libertarians' view of property rights always breaks down at the most convenient points for them.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 7, 2013 -> 12:41 PM) Well the M.O. of the time was war. The natives did it to each other for stuff, the settlers back on their home continent were doing it for stuff. It was just the way things worked. Also, they arent all dead. Theyre still there, we eventually gave them chunks of land and stuck to the promise of letting them keep it. Is there a German reservation on the Alsace-Lorraine? Do we lament the loss of the Roman Empire? I mean, Northern Ireland still exists!! I dont condemn those European examples of brute force conquest and more than I do what happened in the New World. Its just the way things happened. Channel your inner Vonnegut and accept it without trying to do so much in the present to attempt righting an irreversible wrong of the past. Its a waste, there are bad things happening in places like South Africa that you can do something about now. We "gave" them land after forcibly removing them to that land, oh and then have continued to take more lands, and the ratio of promises the US has kept versus broken is gotta be greater than one in one hundred. Books.Go read them.

QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 7, 2013 -> 12:30 PM) I was thinking of pre-colonization and areas of the world where there were many nomadic tribes who were living in peace. The so called noble savage. But since we probably do not wish to debate the essential nature of man I will stick to north America. In North America I'll agree with Duke and Balta on the physical war between the Native Americans and the settlers. Most of the tribes, especially those west of teh Appalachian Mountains were skilled fighters. I will make the point that the war that the white man won, as much as the fighting, was in the courts and two very different understandings of land ownership. How treaties were ripped up once they were no longer advantageous to white settlers. The native Americans had a terrible understanding of these sorts of legal proceedings and how important the agreements would become. That is the war they had no understanding of. The same class war we fight today. The noble savage is an ignorant stereotype

QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 7, 2013 -> 10:15 AM) I agree he didn't write anything close to that. In fact that is my point. That if it was phrased better, and by someone who has not posted ugly racist posts prior, it would not have been so soundly denounced. And I wasn't trying to make any excuses either. What I was trying to point out is the kernel of truth in Duke's ugly racist posts. Mandela was not a saint from birth. I believe Mandela became one. It highlights the remarkable ability and potential for all of us to change. His racism wouldn't be any less disgusting if it were "phrased better." His ideas aren't the ones you've portrayed in that post. They're just dumb, ignorant racism from a child.

Nah, I'm just going to take duke's explicitly racist posting history combined with his racist posts itt and his generally horrible ideology for what they are. No need to make excuses or try to play negotiator for his bulls***. He hasn't been saying anything remotely like your hypothetical quote, and what he had said isn't just "slightly"more inflammatory.

Do you even believe that bulls*** you're trying to deflect with? Or are you really trying that hard to rationalize your racism and ignorance?

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 6, 2013 -> 09:08 PM) Not really, Im just wondering what they replaced Apartheid with really has a moral leg to stand on. Uh, "not apartheid" is that leg. As the Most Not Racist,I would have thought you would know that. But maybe your view of Africans is similar to your view of Syrians: "biologically"humans but really just a bunch of murderous savages. You never seem to miss an opportunity to s*** on a real civil rights movement while whining about "freedom"

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Dec 6, 2013 -> 05:45 PM) You know I couldn't even count the number of dead eagles I saw downtown today there were so many. I would love to see a Catskills a bald eagle. Your liberal douchiness is astounding. good post compelling argument would read again a+++++++!

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 6, 2013 -> 04:34 PM) Nothing I said is racist. At all. Go back abd find me the smoking gun of this horrible bigotry. QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 6, 2013 -> 04:39 PM) In fact, Im the least racist person in this thread. I maintain this ANC crap has failed but everyone else defends it. People are actually suffering under these assholes, and we fail to exert the same international pressure to oust the ANC because the see South Africans as pet negros they can use to prove how rainbow they are. People would rather they suffer than backtrack on how awful their government is due to political correctness. Are you drinking again or? edit: good time to link to how least-racist-person Duke described the 50th anniversary of one of the biggest moments of the civil rights movement in this country, the March on Washington for Jobs and Equality: QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Sep 6, 2013 -> 05:04 PM) At this point I'm familiar enough with liberal horses*** to know "jobs" means "excuses why I don't have one" and equality means "more free s*** please." So I wouldn't expected anyone with any dignity to show up for the Rally for Handouts and Laziness. Also let's be very clear, your position throughout this thread hasn't been "ANC has done a poor job of governing in post-Apartheid SA." It's been a bunch of JBS-style slander of Mandela and open consideration of whether apartheid really was that bad and should have been ended.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 6, 2013 -> 03:14 PM) Kinda like how many say US started after congressional congress not necessarily after Yorktown. Or the Articles of Confederation

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 6, 2013 -> 03:01 PM) I understand, but I'm just kind of a stickler for being exact. I don't think it's inexact to say that Apartheid SA and Post-Apartheid SA are completely different things, though. The entire government was scrapped.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 6, 2013 -> 02:54 PM) One thing I keep noticing, and it's hardly a big deal, but people keep calling SA 20 years old. It became its own republic in 1961. Yes, it's gone through changes in leadership and equality, but it's still the same country. It'd be like saying America is only 49 years old because of the civil rights act of 1964. Or considering it a new country with each new President or Congressional majority. Well, the 1994 election was held with the specific intention of completely scrapping apartheid. They were working with a temporary constitution from that election until a new one was ratified a couple years later. It wasn't really equivalent to the Civil Rights Act or even the Reconstruction Amendments, but if we had instead scrapped the entire constitution and started over. Essentially everything about the political entity "South Africa" changed starting in 1994. lol, this line from the wikipedia on the interim constitution is pretty hilarious:

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 6, 2013 -> 02:48 PM) Also their yearly GDP pre and post sanctions pretty much met up until the global crash of 08. Pretty good as it moves from exploitative mining economy for the few to an exploitative mining economy for some more that can also be taxed and distributed to benefit more of the country now that it's not run by oppressive minority rule. But things have gotten worse for that oppressive minority. Is that really worth it??