Kaepernick

jeffbr

F Me In The Brain said:

Dude was an absolute beast for a few years, the whole "suck at football" angle is silly.
He was not good enough overall to stick, but his skill level was great.  Damn near had a super bowl ring as well...if the team could just have defended against the mighty Joe Flacco.  ? 

Well, he was good until he wasn't. I admitted that most of my dislike of him stemmed from his being a rival QB. SEA and SF had a pretty good rivalry going for a bit. Kap, RGIII and Wilson were the golden boys, and Kap and RGIII were getting the big press, while Russ was quietly doing his thing in the wilderness of Seattle. RGIII broke down, Kap took a shit, and Russ rose to the top of that pecking order. I thought Kap was a publicity whore and once teams figured him out, he just wasn't the caliber QB I'd want starting for my team. As I also said, he'd have never replaced Wilson in Seattle. He wasn't good enough, and he wasn't liked enough. So yeah, I'll grant you that he had talent, and a couple of good years. But then became just another average QB who would never dominate the league. I think protests were his career move to remain relevant. I guess he's remained in the news, but not sure about the relevant part. Anyway, glad to this day that we didn't sign him.

cp3iverson

I’ll only comment from a football standpoint. I don't want to call him gimmicky but its like someone said.  Once coordinators finally adjusted he was done for.  Some mobile QBs were able to adjust and stay in the pocket.  He just didn't have “it” and it showed.  Could have been a nice 2nd or 3rd stringer and had a long career but he refused those opportunities.  

cincybearcat

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

Due your strawman gals equivalencies have you acting like a snowflake.

brianlux

He sucked.

He didn't suck.

He sucked.

He didn't suck.

OK.  I guess he sucked and he didn't suck.

But what he's been doing lately seems like good work to me.  Standing up for African Americans is good, important work in a nation like ours rife, with its long history of racism.

dignin

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

mrussel1

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

The point of the picture isn't about Nike's right as a company to do what they want.  It's to show that even the first black president evidently did not associate that flag with racism.  I think it's 100% relevant to the discussion about the flag and whether it's a direct reflection of racism, not whether Nike does/not have the right to make or recall any shoe they want. 

HughFreakingDillon

mrussel1 said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

The point of the picture isn't about Nike's right as a company to do what they want.  It's to show that even the first black president evidently did not associate that flag with racism.  I think it's 100% relevant to the discussion about the flag and whether it's a direct reflection of racism, not whether Nike does/not have the right to make or recall any shoe they want. 

exactly. this isn't hard to understand. 

HughFreakingDillon

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

add another one to the list. 

dignin

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

add another one to the list. 

If you can't bother to make a coherent response I'm not going to waste my time.

dignin

mrussel1 said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

The point of the picture isn't about Nike's right as a company to do what they want.  It's to show that even the first black president evidently did not associate that flag with racism.  I think it's 100% relevant to the discussion about the flag and whether it's a direct reflection of racism, not whether Nike does/not have the right to make or recall any shoe they want. 

I may disagree with what this whole thing is about with you, but at least you take the time to write out a genuine response. So thanks for that.

Either way this whole Nike flag thing is pretty stupid (and in my opinion being blow way out of proportion) and not really worth the argument (for me anyways). So I'm bowing out.

Happy 4th to you.

mrussel1

dignin said:

mrussel1 said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

The point of the picture isn't about Nike's right as a company to do what they want.  It's to show that even the first black president evidently did not associate that flag with racism.  I think it's 100% relevant to the discussion about the flag and whether it's a direct reflection of racism, not whether Nike does/not have the right to make or recall any shoe they want. 

I may disagree with what this whole thing is about with you, but at least you take the time to write out a genuine response. So thanks for that.

Either way this whole Nike flag thing is pretty stupid (and in my opinion being blow way out of proportion) and not really worth the argument (for me anyways). So I'm bowing out.

Happy 4th to you.

Happy 4th.  Or belated Canada Day?

dignin

mrussel1 said:

dignin said:

mrussel1 said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

The point of the picture isn't about Nike's right as a company to do what they want.  It's to show that even the first black president evidently did not associate that flag with racism.  I think it's 100% relevant to the discussion about the flag and whether it's a direct reflection of racism, not whether Nike does/not have the right to make or recall any shoe they want. 

I may disagree with what this whole thing is about with you, but at least you take the time to write out a genuine response. So thanks for that.

Either way this whole Nike flag thing is pretty stupid (and in my opinion being blow way out of proportion) and not really worth the argument (for me anyways). So I'm bowing out.

Happy 4th to you.

Happy 4th.  Or belated Canada Day?

Belated, thanks!

HughFreakingDillon

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

add another one to the list. 

If you can't bother to make a coherent response I'm not going to waste my time.

that's rich coming from you.

and you obviously didn't understand that was the point of my comment. 

added to the list. 

Dirtie_Frank

mcgruff10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

We all know that Obama was racist. Duh

According to some recently he also had a racist VP

dignin

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

add another one to the list. 

If you can't bother to make a coherent response I'm not going to waste my time.

added to the list. 

brianlux

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

add another one to the list. 

If you can't bother to make a coherent response I'm not going to waste my time.

added to the list. 

Buscemi, lol!  Cool!

mrussel1

brianlux said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

add another one to the list. 

If you can't bother to make a coherent response I'm not going to waste my time.

added to the list. 

Buscemi, lol!  Cool!

Always Mr. Pink. 

brianlux

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

add another one to the list. 

If you can't bother to make a coherent response I'm not going to waste my time.

added to the list. 

Buscemi, lol!  Cool!

Always Mr. Pink. 

What's the reference?  Also, what film is the gif from?  Not sure I've seen it (or forgot), and I really like Buscemi's work!

mickeyrat

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Obama's second inauguration. 

What's your point? Flying flags in government from a historical perspective is far different than a private company choosing what they want to put on their product. Nobody is saying we should pretend the flag doesn't exist.

that's funny, since you just stated the exact same argument folks had for keeping monuments and confederate flags from the civil war era in government. 

"historical perspective". 

What does the confederate flag have to do with this? Governments taking down confederate monuments is no where in the same league as a company choosing not to associate their brand and product with something. If Nike was trying to get the flag taken down from government institutions you may have a point.

That's what we call a strawman.

oh, the strawman again, haha. I wasn't comparing the two (nike and government) at all. my comment was addressing the part where you stated that it is ok to fly a flag in government from a historical perspective. did you support the removal of the confederate flag and monuments from government buildings?

You are making an argument against an argument I have not made. Textbook straw man.

I didn't say it was "ok" to fly any flag, you are making that up. I haven't said if I think it's right or wrong. I said it was very different, and to compare what a business does and what a government does in this regard is stupid.

I'm not the one talking about confederate flags and monuments, you are. Again, decisions by governments and decisions by businesses are made differently.

And what difference does it make if I did or did not support the removal of confederate monuments? It's completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

Also, if you weren't comparing Nike to the government, why post that picture at all? 

add another one to the list. 

If you can't bother to make a coherent response I'm not going to waste my time.

added to the list. 

Buscemi, lol!  Cool!

Always Mr. Pink. 

What's the reference?  Also, what film is the gif from?  Not sure I've seen it (or forgot), and I really like Buscemi's work!

Mr Pink is from Reservoir Dogs.

The Gif is from Billy Madison

mrussel1

He don't tip...