Sega-16 Politics Thread

One of the most interesting things I have seen with Rush Limbaugh was when he was trying to buy % in the St. Louis Rams. Which given his statement about football being a match between the Bloods and Crips ironic. Anyways the NFL wanted no part of the guy even though Goddell is a republican and I am sure most of the owners are republicans too. Then we had George Sorros trying to do a similar move with the Washington Nations but Some Republican lawmakers suggested that they might move to revoke baseball's antitrust exemption if Soros bought the team.[52]. Which is hilarious on there part.

Anyone remember this? http://espn.go.com/gen/news/2003/1001/1628537.html

LoLimbaugh.

Whether one likes or dislikes Limbaugh, is what he said incorrect and if so, why? For as many people disagreeing with him, no one has said why.

Would it be more appropriate in saying the leagues are filled with hoodlums or what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCU

Whether one likes or dislikes Limbaugh, is what he said incorrect and if so, why? For as many people disagreeing with him, no one has said why.

Would it be more appropriate in saying the leagues are filled with hoodlums or what?

---

No, it would not be.
There are certainly several high profile people in ALL sports that get into trouble (usually drugs/drinking).

And you can certainly say their attitudes aren't the best.

But as far as I'm aware, the vast majority of athletes in any given sport are fairly decent and law abiding people.

So unless there's a statistic showing 50% or more of NBA and NFL players are skirting around jail time, out on bail, etc. Then no, they are not "filled" with hoodlums.

A more accurate statement would be "There are a number of athletes in the NFL/NBA/Whatever who show conduct I feel is not befitting a professional athlete."

For me, I agree with whoever earlier said that peoples fascination and apparent reverence for sports is stupid.

Your assessment would be correct if the focus was only on the off field antics and behavior but people (not just Limbaugh) watch the on-the-field or court behavior as well.

The word hoodlums is one I used because I remember watching these games as a kid and teen and what I see now has changed dramatically. The way players carried themselves both then and now are so different and not necessarily for the better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCU

Your assessment would be correct if the focus was only on the off field antics and behavior but people (not just Limbaugh) watch the on-the-field or court behavior as well.

The word hoodlums is one I used because I remember watching these games as a kid and teen and what I see now has changed dramatically. The way players carried themselves both then and now are so different and not necessarily for the better.

---

That's because there was far more focus "back in the day" of being a good team. Now it's about being a superstar. You want people to know who YOU are. Then you get on the news, in videos, television commercials, shows, movies, etc.

It's a completely different game now because of that. Too many players don't want to be on a successful team anywhere near as much as they want to be the next big superstar and get paid (both on court/field and off).

Unfortunately that line of thinking by players permeates what people see when they turn on a game. Certain behaviors that were not not the norm have now become the norm and rather than being discouraged they seem to be encouraged.

As someone who sits in the middle of politics and believes in smaller government, individual rights, the Constitution, common sense, etc.., I'm not really a fan of commentators but them being right or wrong should not be determined by their political persuasion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCU

Unfortunately that line of thinking by players permeates what people see when they turn on a game. Certain behaviors that were not not the norm have now become the norm and rather than being discouraged they seem to be encouraged.

As someone who sits in the middle of politics and believes in smaller government, individual rights, the Constitution, common sense, etc.., I'm not really a fan of commentators but them being right or wrong should not be determined by their political persuasion.

---

I agree.

But the flip side of that is that the Republican party has had an increasingly bad issue with the far right leaning gaining more and more power within the party.
The Democratic party has far less influence from the furthest left leaning in the party.

This creates a massive problem where major Republican candidates have horrible PR issues because even if they are more central leaning, they are still crazy far right compared to your average voter.

The people they put up as the "best" of their party for presidential nominations are frighteningly bad.
Too many of them are out of touch, and some are VERY out of touch.

I know there are some awesome republicans out there who are normal people. I'm sure there's plenty of politically active ones who are as well. But the majority of the country won't ever see them.

The Republican party has, IMO, become toxic to itself. As bad as Democrats are, the Republicans tend to put up much worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCU

Whether one likes or dislikes Limbaugh, is what he said incorrect and if so, why? For as many people disagreeing with him, no one has said why.

Would it be more appropriate in saying the leagues are filled with hoodlums or what?

---

He said it looks like Bloods and Crips minus weapons? I mean really you ask what is incorrect about that?

I'm not sure why anyone listens to the right and left mouth pieces on the news. They get paid millions to run their mouths. It's not like they are average joes by any stretch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EclecticGroove

I agree.

But the flip side of that is that the Republican party has had an increasingly bad issue with the far right leaning gaining more and more power within the party.
The Democratic party has far less influence from the furthest left leaning in the party.

This creates a massive problem where major Republican candidates have horrible PR issues because even if they are more central leaning, they are still crazy far right compared to your average voter.

The people they put up as the "best" of their party for presidential nominations are frighteningly bad.
Too many of them are out of touch, and some are VERY out of touch.

I know there are some awesome republicans out there who are normal people. I'm sure there's plenty of politically active ones who are as well. But the majority of the country won't ever see them.

The Republican party has, IMO, become toxic to itself. As bad as Democrats are, the Republicans tend to put up much worse.

---

While for the most part I lean towards the democrats, there are some things where I agree with the republicans or lean more towards there position. I do agree that republicans are out of touch but than again I think most politicians, celebs and news anchors are out of touch with reality. All of that being said I think it would be in the republican party's best interest to distance themselves as much as possible from the far right positions of the tea party

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EclecticGroove

I agree.

But the flip side of that is that the Republican party has had an increasingly bad issue with the far right leaning gaining more and more power within the party.
The Democratic party has far less influence from the furthest left leaning in the party.

This creates a massive problem where major Republican candidates have horrible PR issues because even if they are more central leaning, they are still crazy far right compared to your average voter.

The people they put up as the "best" of their party for presidential nominations are frighteningly bad.
Too many of them are out of touch, and some are VERY out of touch.

I know there are some awesome republicans out there who are normal people. I'm sure there's plenty of politically active ones who are as well. But the majority of the country won't ever see them.

Who can the Dems put up that are good and can relate to the average voter? Klinton? Biden? We get screwed either way.

The Republican party has, IMO, become toxic to itself. As bad as Democrats are, the Republicans tend to put up much worse.

---

When the Democrats had control of Congress you better believe the influential members were far left leaning. Quite a few members they pushed as being the next best Democrat were indeed far left Liberals. Hell, some of the leaders of various committees were burying the needle to the left.

Whatever the case may be and where ever one stands, the people wanted to change legislative direction during the past two elections.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Da_Shocker

He said it looks like Bloods and Crips minus weapons? I mean really you ask what is incorrect about that?

---

Have you actually explained why he is wrong or do you just say he is wrong?

The only problem here is who he is speaking about. You know as well as I do someone in the majority can not make any negative comment about those in the minority w/o backlash. The professionalism seems to be in very short supply in pro sports these days. Limbaugh is not the first guy to say the NBA is a thug league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCU

When the Democrats had control of Congress you better believe the influential members were far left leaning. Quite a few members they pushed as being the next best Democrat were indeed far left Liberals. Hell, some of the leaders of various committees were burying the needle to the left.

Whatever the case may be and where ever one stands, the people wanted to change legislative direction during the past two elections.

---

The Democrats you see presented to the people by the Democratic party are VERY rarely even close to leaning as far as the Republicans given face time.

Both have their extremists with influence. But the Republican party has a massive issue in terms of what is presented to the people.
It isn't seen as the party of Rich old (Usually some form of Christian) white men for no reason. They actively seem to present themselves as such the vast majority of the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCU

Have you actually explained why he is wrong or do you just say he is wrong?

The only problem here is who he is speaking about. You know as well as I do someone in the majority can not make any negative comment about those in the minority w/o backlash. The professionalism seems to be in very short supply in pro sports these days. Limbaugh is not the first guy to say the NBA is a thug league.

---

So, you don't see an issue with calling them a bunch of murderous, raping, drug using/dealing, violent black thugs that just happened to put down their weapons for a game?

He's wrong because he basically called a bunch of people who don't act the way he wants (and I'm not defending their actions) a bunch of literally criminal gang bangers.

He could have said they are acting unprofessional, or inappropriate. He could have even said they were acting like criminals.
But he went for a newsbait line and called them out in a way that was guaranteed to get the wrong kind of press. (Which he could later whine about and use to get more attention).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EclecticGroove

The Democrats you see presented to the people by the Democratic party are VERY rarely even close to leaning as far as the Republicans given face time.

Both have their extremists with influence. But the Republican party has a massive issue in terms of what is presented to the people.
It isn't seen as the party of Rich old (Usually some form of Christian) white men for no reason. They actively seem to present themselves as such the vast majority of the time.

---

Each party has a stereotype or two befitting them and being that I don't want to offend, it's wise I don't tell you what the Democratic Party is known as.

Either way, the people have spoken loud and clear and for whatever reason decided it was best to give Congress to the right.

Have you forgotten the Democratic leaders of recent time? Kennedy, Pelosi, Klinton, Reid, etc.., are only a few coming to mind. There are quite the number who are advocating for amnesty for illegals, severe gun control, more intrusion in our lives, bigger government, etc..,

One thing both sides have in common is how the leaders of each party are too old and just out of touch yet the respected district won't fire them. The left has them and the right but contrary to popular belief the right does not have the market cornered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EclecticGroove

So, you don't see an issue with calling them a bunch of murderous, raping, drug using/dealing, violent black thugs that just happened to put down their weapons for a game?

He's wrong because he basically called a bunch of people who don't act the way he wants (and I'm not defending their actions) a bunch of literally criminal gang bangers.

He could have said they are acting unprofessional, or inappropriate. He could have even said they were acting like criminals.
But he went for a newsbait line and called them out in a way that was guaranteed to get the wrong kind of press. (Which he could later whine about and use to get more attention).

---

You're advocating for a more politically correct approach to the matter. Saying the members of these leagues are acting like criminals, as you put forth, is not any less offensive than saying they are gang members but the media can and will interject color into the issue. He could have easily called the PGA or PBA a bunch of uptight retired David Duke supporters and barely an eye would blink. You know it, I know it.

No, I don't have an issue with his terminology for a few reasons. First, he is entitled to any opinion he wants. I'm not one of those ditto-heads people who think it is an honor to speak with him for 15 seconds nor do I take exception with the opinions of an over-paid, under-worked commentator. Second, these leagues are becoming rich with hooligans based on how they act on and off your television and you seem to be in agreement. Third, I'm not a supporter of being pc and personally I feel it is a major harm to our society. Whether it is Alan Combs or Limbaugh, more power if they don't want to follow pc approach.

I know what the Democrats are known as, but ask yourself which is the more publicly damaging image?
It's certainly not the Democrats. Over the last several years the Dems have made numerous mistakes and flubs, or just been involved in situations that should have all but handed the government over to the Republican party.
And yet they still manage to present people so terrifyingly out of touch with the average US citizen that they still lose. And I'm not talking about out of touch in their deep down heart of hearts. I'm talking about how they present themselves to people.

I still don't see why anyone is against amnesty for illegals either. You don't want them here using services and getting away with stuff? Fine, make them a citizen and be on the radar and accountable. They are already here, and a great many of them want to work and be a productive member of society. The ones who want to be a leech or a criminal are going to be a leech or a criminal either way.

And Republican talking points can't say shit about being "more into peoples lives" until they stop making such huge deals about abortion, gay marriage, etc.
Both parties have terrible people and terrible policies, and I 1000000000% percent agree that almost all of them need to keel over dead and let others come in at this point. Every government position needs term limits. Too many have made their job a career unto itself. That works on both sides of the political divide.

But for the last several years, in terms of general party politics and presentations, the Democrats have been the far lesser of two horrible evils. Individual Republican politicians can be damned good. But the party as a whole needs to implode and reform itself into something better. Then maybe the Democrats can follow suit.

As for the PC Rush.
No, it's not the same.
"Behaving like criminals" is not anywhere near as bad as "You're a bunch of violent minority thugs".
Being who he is, he's going to take heat no matter what he says... he's already got that by default because of being a terrible person.
But if some nobody made the same comment, the first one is going to be taken a LOT better than the second.