- The Gridiron Palace Forums (Football Message Board)
- → Viewing Profile: Reputation: Omerta
OmertaMember Since 10 Jan 2012
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 09:46 PM
- Group TGP Prime+
- Active Posts 4,010
- Profile Views 8,625
- Member Title John Harbaugh is an Idiot.
- Age Age Unknown
- Birthday Birthday Unknown
Ngata Awards Case
Posted by Omerta on 18 August 2018 - 09:29 PM
Posted by Omerta on 15 August 2018 - 04:29 PM
So I mean I don't think they are endangered necessarily. Ironically enough, Trump being in power at the moment is one of the few things keeping them lol. If he is impeached, handing the country over to Pence and sessions would be turribad.
Posted by Omerta on 14 August 2018 - 01:06 PM
Homophobia is weird man. There are a lot of levels of homophobia. I'm more homophobic than some less than a lot I like to think. I try my best not to be but in reality I still am. I think a lot of people who are homophobic are for gay rights out of principal even if they don't like gay people or even if they think it's wrong which is weird. Kind of like struggling between what they know is right vs how they were brought up. I think there are people who hate gay people and don't care if they have rights buy how many people really hate gays vs. how many people just have never really been around openly gay people?
If I had to guess, Ngata is a little homophobic but I don't think he's the type of guy that hates gay people. I know a lot of people who came up the way he did, got into the same kind of field as him.
JD I would say is way less homophobic. I know he has extensive experience working in restaurants and has probably known a lot of gay people compared to a Marine construction worker turned business owner. Different life experiences. Neither of these guys are hateful. Cynical? Sure but I don't see hatred.
Most people who aren't homophobic at all have had life experiences or known family members or had friends etc. If you're only image of a group of people is their social media presence then of course you will think they're shit lol. I think overall people need to be less homphobic and we're making strides but understanding has to be there on both sides. If someone feels you're unwilling to listen to what they have to say they will never listen to you.
It depends on your definition of homophobic. If two dudes are two chicks want to have sex, God bless them. I have nothing against that, I have nothing against that lifestyle. there's only one part of the lgbtq community that doesn't make any sense to me. That's transgender people, and I by no means think they should be deprived of Rights. What it is for me, is the children who believe they're transgender whose parents put them on puberty blockers. I think that is an absolutely draconian practice. I think it's horrible, because what if it is just a phase. To be fair, it could be permanent and it might help them, but could you imagine having your hormonal development completely screwed up because somebody put you on something that artificially mess with your hormones, for something that was a phase? Even though, that really doesn't affect me personally so they can do what they want.
what bothers me about the lgbtq thing on principle is the fact that you can't question anything about it. I view it much like the military. Most of the people in the military are outstanding people who are there to do something that they believe is a good thing. I believe the majority of the lgbtq community is the same way. However to deny that there are thousands of people in the military, and lgbtq Community for that matter, who are bad people is insane. the fact that were not allowed to question any of this is what really bothers me, as if there's some protected class that's above reproach. you can't even question the most basic of things, it's like we're told that they're all good people and that we can't question that. Any other cross-section of people, and we could talk about it openly, this one though, not hardly.
Just look at this conversation, bunch of cunts who bullied some lady, can't be called that because they belong to a community where you can't question it. What kind of sense does that make? We want to talk about equality but we can't point out flaws and another group of people? I mean sure we can sit here and allow the good things that they did all day, which I'm fine with. Elton John's the man, the guy who plays Sheldon Cooper's awesome, there's plenty of good examples of gay people littered throughout our society. That being said when there's a group of people that screw up, and they just so happen to believe in that Community, you can't say anything. Granted I don't believe Blots embodies Democrats by and large and is not their voice so this conversation could be a bad analogy to how DEMOCRATS converse.
it's just like the thing at Charlottesville, those group of racist assholes are not indicative of the entire white race, and nobody has an issue calling that group of people out for being a bunch of dick heads. God forbid you do that to another group of people though.
Posted by Omerta on 06 August 2018 - 05:37 PM
This is more than likely true. The official police report says there was enough explosive power to totally destroy the cafeteria where hundreds of students were eating. It just didn't detonate.
Their original plan was to detonate that bomb and shoot survivors as they fled the school. I believe a page from Eric Harris' journal or online blog confirmed that.
I am by no means saying we shouldn't even bother addressing the gun problem, but I guess the question is would that become the alternative? If it is did we really solve anything? I mean, it seems like people are going to try to kill people one way or the other, we really have no idea how it's going to pan out. I mean that's not to say we shouldn't try something like I said, I just wouldn't hold my breath for a dramatic reduction in it.
I really don't think banning guns, or even assault rifles would work. At least not in this country, I know it's a popular argument that other countries do and so we can too. That really isn't the case though, we can ban whaling and almost eliminated completely, but Japan can't seem to do the same thing. Why? Because it's a part of their culture comment has been as long as they've been a nation, and probably will continue to be. That is how the United States has with guns, we're not getting rid of them, we're not Banning them, and in all likelihood we're probably not going to ban assault rifles. It just won't happen in my opinion. It is too ingrained in our culture, it is a part of Who We Are. For Better or Worse, I think we're stuck with them, and obviously I don't mind that, but a lot of people who were to ban this or band that, I think they're going to be disappointed if they think that's going to be a realistic outcome.
Posted by Omerta on 05 August 2018 - 12:01 AM
Contrary to popular belief the NRA doesn't kill people. Rest assured they will go nowhere, a LOT of their big donors donated. I just put a substantial sum in them to make sure I do my part as well as a lot of business owners.
People saying the NRA is responsible for gun deaths are the same kind of people who say planned Parenthood mass murder children.
Posted by Omerta on 30 July 2018 - 07:36 AM
Speaking of dogs, we recently buried our Pitbull, but she was old, I think she was 13 or 14, and she had a good run. We've been thinking about buying a new dog, and I came a breath away from buying a brand new German Shepherd that was 10 weeks old. That said I really can't justify spending $3, 000 when there's dogs in the pound that are just as good of dogs. We've been making trips there a couple times a month to see if we catch any dog that we just can't live without.
My daughter is doing dance lessons, so when I'm not at football, or mowing our grass, I am usually at a dance recital of Macy's.
I don't know if you were around, but my wife became an orthopedic surgeon, and she has been extremely busy. I mean not so much in the sense we would think is a normal 8 to 5. But they'll be days or she's gone for 2 or 3 days, and she just sleeps at the hospital, and then she'll come home for 5. We've all kind of had to adjust to that schedule, and she's kind of upset that she's missing dance recitals and football games.
It's good to hear from you Charles, I am glad to hear that you have gotten your mind right, and that you've taken some time for yourself to get everything in order. Once you get your mind right, everything else falls into place. I too like everyone else will wait with bated breath to see the rottweiler pictures.
Posted by Omerta on 26 July 2018 - 11:17 AM
The first reason is because in that link and in poppers other written works he maintains the standard of tolerance is a criteria arbitrarily interpreted by societal norms. Not conducive to minorities or people with different idieas getting their own shake really.
The second is that the paradox of tolerance is a paradox of a paradox because it allows people be intolerant carte blanche because it is justified by standing your ground, and is covered under an umbrella of of tolerance. So really the intolerant are intolerant but it's ok because other people are. There is no tolerance there at all.
The third is that it completely neglects the fact that there is no hard proof of subjective feelings. You can't prove how you feel is the right way to do things with any sort of definitive evidence. So without a starting point to all agree on it is left up to the individual to interpret societal norms. Which in it of itself means that the collective is separate individuals who interpret everything different, so there is no starting point to "norms".
If we go by that transgenders don't have rights because they are normal and animals don't chew off their genitals, so really they are the only things on Earth that dispute their born gender.
I have encountered this argument several times and what it is, is for people to be an asshole but absolve themselves because "society would approve." Which in this case is obviously not the case because the majority of people thought Trump would be better, so are the people who voted for him the people who set societal standards? If that's the case you are the intolerant one.
Posted by Omerta on 22 July 2018 - 04:01 PM
Under no circumstances are you to engage with subhuman species that calls themselves philelliot. If you encounter him on a message board do not talk to him. If you pass him on the street, pee into his helmet, tip your hat to his mom, and leisurely stroll in the opposite direction extending your sympathies to every passerby for having to support the creature whose soul purpose is to convert oxygen to carbon monoxide, and raise your children to be the antithesis of it.
OPTION: You may also thank it's mother for letting it live with her until he is 65 so that way you will never have to worry about it as a neighbor.
Posted by Omerta on 22 July 2018 - 11:24 AM
Hmm, I think you're mostly being humorous through this post can't but tell for sure.
To clarify, I never thought she lost because she was a woman, I thought she lost because she had a shitty campaign and she thought she was somehow good enough or entitled to the presidency that the quality of her campaign didn't matter. My reservations against her had little to do with her being a woman.
Though reading your post again I'm quite sure you were just being humorous, lol.
It was absolutely humorous. Well sort of.
I do not think you are sexist, much like the majority of the country. It was moreso playing at the stupidity of the people who think that she lost because this country is so misogynistic we would not elect her, because she has a vagina. It couldn't be because she was the worst candidate in presidential history, and she ran the dumbest campaign that was possible....Noooooooooooo, not that.
Posted by Omerta on 21 July 2018 - 10:34 AM
I think she is a little doe-eyed and honestly has no fucking idea what she is talking about, but we are going to find out. I am more than willing to give her the chance and see what she has, because she is absolutely representative of the pulse of this country. The democrats got lazy in an election AGAIN and another heavily favored candidate lost to the upstart. In this case the consequence is lot less in this instance than Donald Trump.
I think the party that realizes the people of this country are tired of the status quo, and the establishment itself, is going to have power for a while. I think both parties are on equal footing there, with maybe a slight lead to the republicans. If you look at the presidential race the alt left candidate was Bernie, and the alt right candidate is now our president. The republicans were pretty much put in a position by their constituency that Trump had to win the nomination no matter how much they wished it were Cruz or Rubio. Democrats undercut their upstart that people wanted, and actively sabotaged him. So the Republicans may have a slight lead in that area at the moment, which is shitty, but the Democrats have people like SOC who are starting to run and get young people excited, so we will see.
I think it is also worth noting young conservatives and young democrats could find more middle ground than a lot of people realize, we just get hung up on 5 issues we are never going to change, and we put blinders on and ignore other things we COULD fix. The younger we get in politics I think the better we are going to be. Which is funny because you millennials outnumber the baby boomers but dont vote like they do. this country could already be yours. You just cant seem to find a relatively straight candidate who represents issues instead of just being a woman, and thus breaking history so you are with her, even though she was as flawed as her counterpart. Put up Lizzie, O'Malley, or a few others and you might just win an election straight out.
Posted by Omerta on 21 July 2018 - 12:41 AM
Personally if they worked in the public sector I would say you HAVE to let them. Since it is private though they can do what they want.
Posted by Omerta on 19 July 2018 - 05:42 PM
This is the biggest thing that bothers me... We do the same sorts of things to dozens of countries around the world every single day -- including Russia. This whole thing is par for the course. Doesn't make it 'right' but the punishment should fit the crime and I like your suggestion.
This whole story is so hypocritical. We as a country as very hypocritical.
Focus on this (relatively) nothing Russa story while we have dark money trying to stop Michigan voters from fucking gerrymandering in the ass. Focus on Russia while, domestically we LITERALLY RIG OUR OWN ELECTIONS with no punishments.
But yeah, Russia is the problem. lol
Exactly what you just said. This thing goes on for every develop Nation, to every other developed Nation, on the planet. We are no exception, nor is Russia, nor France, nor Germany common or Italy, nor Japan, nor China, so basically the rest of the globe. You absolutely nailed it with that fact.
I also absolutely loved the point you made about the hypocrisy of our country. Liberals are all in a tizzy right now because Donald Trump did something that looks like rigging an election, however Hillary Clinton can rig an election for the DNC and nobody even remotely thinks about treason. The exact same thing is happening right now, Trump may have had some ties with Russia, none of which has really definitively been proven by something we can read, although I doubt it ever will, that's how these things work. Just as the Republicans were throwing all that mud on Hillary, they turn around and get some mud on themselves and now liberals want to talk about trees and, while Republicans were trying to talk about crooked Hillary, but I don't ever recall treason. Not that that matters, that's kind of a trivial point considering Donald Trump will literally never get convicted of treason. All I'm really saying is that both sides have done their fair share of election rigging, everybody does their fair share of spying, it's just with the other guy does it it's a problem.
elections are not one on moral or social issues anymore, they have not been for a while. Elections these days are one off the backs of how much money can a candidate raise, and how much worse can the other guy look. I guess you could throw a third in there and say that we vote with our wallets now, because we damn sure don't vote with our conscience. When you look at any issue that was brought up in any of the debates every single one of them centered around honey, even the social justice platform was about money. It was about if we give X group a whole bunch of free stuff, and why group can also benefit from this free stuff, as long as he is the only one who has to pay for it because he has the most money, we are good. It always comes down to things like funding, so the average American no longer votes on issues they vote with their wallet.
Posted by Omerta on 15 July 2018 - 08:16 PM
Look you can get into the arguments about this, and I am no stranger to it myself, but the answer is simple. There is no solution.
Humans are a species that are innately born to not be governed, but yet we cannot exist without it.
We are animals after all and for all our arrogance we think we are better because we walk on two legs, and have thumbs. Lions are not governed, they don't understand the concept so they don't bother with it. WE don't really understand it either but we toil with something that goes against our very nature. Take segregation, we are the only animal species that does not segregate. Tribalism is all over the animal kingdom. Not saying we should, but I am saying not doing so goes against our very nature, so we are always going to fight in politics because millions of years evolution has taught us our side is right, and good, and the other side is evil and will hurt us because we don't share common goals.
AS an example, take Blots. He is the most leftist dude on this board, and he is all about inclusion except for a few groups, and we know it, he knows it, and there is nothing wrong with that. I do the same, and so does every man or woman here.
This whole myth of we can all sit around singing Kumbayah, is just that, a myth. It wont ever happen, it has never happened, nor is it happening now. The closer we can get to accepting this truth the more we can learn to coexist. We will never live in complete harmony as a species, but we can coexist much better than we are for sure.
Posted by Omerta on 14 July 2018 - 10:49 PM
If it is internal hit the particulars. Ask them how long have they felt that way and how they feel about their own feelings. Make sure they know it is a serious conversation so they should be clear about how they feel, but make sure they know I love them. Tell them it is ok to feel that way, but to be clear so we can start to change a few things if they choose. If they are saying how they feel as though they are born in the wrong gender, and they are clear on gender and that they want to change, I let them. I would ask if there are things we can change in the household to make them more comfortable.
If it is within reason do my best to accommodate that and let them live life as a man/woman, but make sure it is a genuine experience. If they choose male then make them do things required of men like register for the secret service, go to make restrooms etc so they can see the good and bad of both.
I would proceed like that but if they wanted puberty blockers or any surgery I personally would not foot the bill until roughly 26. If they have left my house and lived life as a man and at 26 said" hey Dad, I have lived this life and my mind is developed and this is still what I want but I can't afford it, can you help with the cost of transitioning?" Then the answer is, Sure! I love you kid.
I have no problem with transgender as long as they are morally upright people, and honest with themselves, and aren't entitled than we won't have issues. As long as they don't allow it to become all that they are. If the sum total of who they are is Transgender then I fucked the dog. I would hope that would be but a fraction of them. I would hope they could say they were people of integrity, hard working, and loved fiercely. I guess I am saying if they could look themselves in the mirror and be proud of who they are I am good with it.
As to the semantics I did not see it that way, I saw it as a clear statement and I don't want it to come on as a dick, if I did I apologize OSU, that is not what I intended.