|
Post by robeiae on Jan 31, 2017 12:58:06 GMT -5
From Nancy Armour at USA Today: Tom Brady has some explaining to do on Donald TrumpFrom it: So, does Tm Brady owe people an explanation with regard to his friendship with Trump? He's said he he doesn't agree with everything coming from Trump. Armour says that's not enough, only a full denunciation will do. What say you?
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jan 31, 2017 13:38:48 GMT -5
Yeah, this is really starting to sound almost Maoist. Why does Brady "owe" anyone anything regarding who he associates with?
People can boo him, shun him, or refuse to watch the Patriots if they are angry at him for his friendship with Trump, but he has no obligation to explain himself or provide a denunciation on demand.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jan 31, 2017 14:13:28 GMT -5
Yeah, we've approached the point now where these types of "demands" that someone needs to give some sort of critical dissertation on why they associate with or even just have an association with Trump is akin to an emotionally immature child whining that just because they hate that booger-eater Sally Thompson, everybody else has to hate her too or they're gonna pitch a fit.
|
|
|
Tom Brady
Jan 31, 2017 15:09:13 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Vince524 on Jan 31, 2017 15:09:13 GMT -5
I hate Tom Brady and the Patriots, but Brady doesn't owe anyone anything in regards to any association with Trump.
Sorry to deflate the thread.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Jan 31, 2017 19:59:57 GMT -5
Guilt by association is a big thing these days, apparently. Nancy Armour needs to get a life.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Feb 7, 2017 9:10:51 GMT -5
Here'a an interesting tidbit that I think raises a serious philosophical question with political implications: heatst.com/politics/tom-brady-super-bowl-media/Not the article, itself. It's largely an example of what it's bitching about: self-righteous media. But note this bit about some activist named Shaun King: Here's a screen grab: /photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw So here's the question: is Karma total bullshit? Because that's what this tweet is really talking about. If Trump is teh evil, and Brady is also teh evil for supporting Trump (or at least not openly condemning him), doesn't Karma dictate that Brady should NOT have staged the greatest comeback in Superbowl history, should NOT have been MVP yet again, and should NOT have become the undisputed king of winning (apologies to Charlie Sheen and Trump)?
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Feb 7, 2017 11:09:13 GMT -5
I assume you're being sarcastic about the "serious philosophical question." There is no such thing as "karma," and I don't see the difference between believing that karma dictated Superbowl results and believing that God heard the prayers of Patriots fans.
Some SJWs do seem to be having meltdowns and claiming that the Patriots win was a victory for white supremacy and proves that America is racist.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Feb 7, 2017 11:52:50 GMT -5
Whether or not karma exists depends on how one defines "karma". There are perfectly reasonable definitions of it in terms of cause and effect of actions and behaviors in a person's life, and there are more "out there" definitions (like those which include the effects on one's "future lives". The one above is BS. And so is the idea that Brady needs to explain anything about Trump.
I am so tired of the screeching outrage about DT that I'm subjected to on a daily basis. I used to enjoy reading the news with my coffee each morning. Now I can hardly stomach it. Especially CNN. The man had enough votes to become POTUS, so obviously not everyone in our country thinks like Nancy Armour.
So, for MY OWN mental health, two things need to happen:
1) the media needs to start reporting the damn news and stop with the agenda driven hit pieces 2) Donald Trump needs to start using caution before he speaks/calls/Tweets/rolls out EOs, and maybe explain to the populace why his administration's actions are actually reasonable (with ample evidence to illustrate why). Most of his enemies (and let's be real, they are just that) are unable to look at the actual policies with objectivity these days, and DT needs to start fostering some of that objectivity.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Feb 7, 2017 12:15:41 GMT -5
I think neither of those two things are going to happen.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Feb 7, 2017 12:26:21 GMT -5
I think neither of those two things are going to happen. Unfortunately, I'm inclined to agree with you. Which doesn't bode well for my mental health. I do think there's a better chance that DT might show a learning curve and settle into his position with a bit more tact, than there is of the opposition turning reasonable.
|
|