Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[EnigmaticHat]

Because there are only two things he has absolute faith in...

Oh... I can't actually listen to sound right now.  Thought we were actually having a serious conversation.  That sounds like something an edgy middle schooler would say.

[Max™]

Perhaps but most would choke up when actually given a microphone or chicken out and not be a supertard for the sake of idiocy.

[Rolan7]

I mean...  He is a radio show host, or something?  A lot of his job is "telling it like it is".  Being intentional un-PC to show that you can.  Of course he likes boobs.  I don't get the problem.

It seems like a silly aside for cheap impact, sure, but not worth literally cutting his mic.  They labeled him inappropriate and actually implied that this act showed the error of his arguments, somehow.  That's not a First Amendment issue, but only because they're not the government.

It's not like he ran out of real material and lingered on a sex joke, he threw a single risque word into the middle of a reasonable point he was making.

[smjjames]

He's a Fox sports radio host. That he came from Fox isn't surprising.

And they were trying to have a serious discussion, even the other commentator hit back at the comments.

[Max™]

On twitter he was talking about making shirts with that on it and donating the proceeds for breast cancer awareness, so, good on him.

[redwallzyl]

On twitter he was talking about making shirts with that on it and donating the proceeds for breast cancer awareness, so, good on him.

I think everyone is fairly aware by now and its kind of a shitty marketing tactic now, or does it actually just go to research now days.

[sluissa]

Kinda fell into his trap though. Rather than making a real argument against what he was saying they focused on the mildly inappropriate oddity in what he said. Notice that he did get most of his point off while the other didn't really manage much of anything.

[Max™]

Which is why I say focus on the dumb shit and ignore the rest, I have no idea what he was talking about!

[sluissa]

Basically that there's a double standard at ESPN. If you hold public conservative opinions, you can be fired. If you hold public liberal opinions, that's apparently okay.

His point was that ESPN has fired people for making public political statements in the past. (And even for things that were misunderstandings.) This time however, for some reason she's getting a free pass on it.

Say what you will about the past, I think they've made a few bad calls, fired people over some dumb stuff, but in the specific case he mentions, Curt Schilling did have a habit of reposting and retweeting things that wouldn't be SFW, and given he was in a very public position it's fair to say ESPN might care what he says, even in a non-official capacity.

Basically, ESPN has fired people for less than what she's done.

Do I think she should be fired? Probably not for this one instance. But I do think that it's a fair point that people don't necessarily want politics in their sports and ESPN is losing subscribers by the truckloads... (Likely for other reasons, but it's fair to take a look and see if politics has anything to do with it.)

On the other hand the other guy barely got out "I know her, and she's a good person."

[Trekkin]

On twitter he was talking about making shirts with that on it and donating the proceeds for breast cancer awareness, so, good on him.

I think everyone is fairly aware by now and its kind of a shitty marketing tactic now, or does it actually just go to research now days.

Mostly it goes to suing people for copyright infringement.

[EnigmaticHat]

There's only one way to deal with an internet troll, and that's to not feed the troll.  Not sure what that even means for a live interview, get a time machine and uninvite him I guess.  Run down the clock with small talk?  But then you're embarrassing yourself by letting the comment go unremarked.

That being said the best way to deal with someone who disengages from the conversation like that is to do carrot instead of stick.  Imply you agree with them without actually saying anything, listen well, and ask just the right question so they decide on their own to explain the most unpopular part of their beliefs.  Then they hang themselves.  Remember how Milo went down?  Not from the pushback against him, but from something he himself said willingly.

Re: ESPN: I'm just going to put it out there.  "Trump is a white supremacist" is not a liberal opinion, its a statement of naked fact.  Clinton never self-identified as neoliberal, never saw anyone fired over calling her that.

[wierd]

Not sure if this belongs here, or in the WTF thread, or in some other thread.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/14/mystery-of-sonic-weapon-attacks-at-us-embassy-in-cuba-deepens

Basically, a total of 21 confirmed cases of a mysterious malady initially presumed to be caused by a focused sonic device have been reported by the US and Canadian governments, concerning diplomats stationed in Cuba.

The malady seems to cause mild traumatic brain injury, but also has signs and symptoms of more severe, targeted nerve degradation. Symptoms include reduced language recall ability, hearing loss, and other debilitating neural function issues.

Personal conjecture: It sounds like a targeted RF weapon that the brain interprets as sound when it interacts with it.

[Trekkin]

Personal conjecture: It sounds like a targeted RF weapon that the brain interprets as sound when it interacts with it.

You would expect a variety of symptoms if brains were being irradiated, though, if only because differences in skull geometry are going to diffract an incoming beam differently. Some people would see lights, for instance.

Still, at least such a beam would be easy to detect -- and easy to shield against.

[EnigmaticHat]

I'm curious if any Cubans were affected.  It seems to me that bystanders could have been caught in the effect and told no one.  Or just told their doctor/spouse/room service.

[Reelya]

Do I think she should be fired? Probably not for this one instance. But I do think that it's a fair point that people don't necessarily want politics in their sports and ESPN is losing subscribers by the truckloads... (Likely for other reasons, but it's fair to take a look and see if politics has anything to do with it.)

On the other hand the other guy barely got out "I know her, and she's a good person."

Whether she gets fired or not is between her and her employer. That's not really a question for politics.

The real question for me is whether it's constitutional for The White House, in an official capacity, to call for her to be fired. That could be seen as undue pressure in breach of the first amendment. e.g. if Obama had called for Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck to be fired, for the much more outlandish things they say, there would have been outrage.